Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
2 Commentary
The book of Isaiah in Greek does not differ in structure from its Hebrew version. It contains the same sections in the same order: the visions against nations (chapters 1-23), first against Judah and Jerusalem (1-12), then against surrounding nations (13-23), with two intervening narrative sections (6-9 and 20); the apocalypse (24-25); the warnings against military alliance with Egypt (26-35), the narratives about Isaiah and Hezekiah (36-39), the Oracles of Comfort (40-55), and the final section promoting ritual purity (56-66).
Isaiah is presented primarily in the form characteristic of Hebrew poetry. Only a few chapters (6-9; 20; 36-39) are presented with a narrative framework. Hebrew poetry is characterized by parallelism, and the Greek translation retains this formal feature. The poetry most commonly conveys messages from Lord God Sabaoth, the Holy One of Israel. The messages are directed to the people of Judah, even if they are addressed to the nations surrounding Judah.
The message varies from section to section, of course, but some uniting themes carry through from beginning to end. The themes include monotheism, trust, reversal, justice and righteousness, pride, judgement, and restoration.
Isaiah has some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world, and this beauty was apparent even in Greek translation. Codex Vaticanus has marginal notes to point out particularly beautiful passages of Isaiah.
Isaiah is one of the three most influential books in Early Judaism. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament both quote from and allude to the Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah more than any other literature. This is the book that shaped Jesus’ self-understanding (Luke 4) and preaching (the upside-down kingdom), and helped Christians make sense of Jesus’ significance, including his role as the suffering servant (49; 53), as righteous judge (11) and his special origins (born of a virgin Isa 7:14; divinity 7; 9). It shaped the self-understanding of the early church as a light to the Gentiles (2; 8) who they thought were replacing the Jews as God’s people because of Jewish rejection of Jesus (6). The book of Revelation drew heavily on the imagery provided by Isaiah, and Isaiah even shaped later ideas about the devil as Lucifer (14).
Chapters 1-23 are united by their form and message. They are prophecies primarily of judgement, in the form of visions. Chapters 1-5 are visions directed against Judah and Jerusalem. Chapters 6-9 continue that geographic interest, but are in the form of narratives about the prophet Isaiah. Chapters 10-12 return to the form of poetic oracles, again in the form of woes.
Greek Isaiah opens with an introduction, identifying the genre, the prophet, the topic, and the time. What is not clear is how much of Isaiah this title is intended to cover.
1 The genre is ὅρασις, “vision,” which is also the normal translation of מראה in LXX. That would seem to limit this title to the initial prophecies that could have been preceived by the prophet in a visionary experience. The narratives beginning in chapter 6 would not fit well under the label of vision. The words ἣν εἶδεν “which he saw” have no counterpart in the MT. Perhaps they were added to the translation as an interpolation by analogy with 13:1, which reads Ὅρασις, ἣν εἶδεν Ἠσαίας υἱὸς Ἀμὼς κατὰ Βαβυλῶνος (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 46), creating a relative clause to replace the Hebrew apposition (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 333). Similar unnecessarily repeated expressions appear in 23:6-7; 41:25; 51:11; 57:11; 65:4. Isaiah is called son of Ἀμώς. Although the Hebrew name אמוץ is not spelled like that of the prophet Amos עמוס, in Greek (and Ethiopic) they are the same (Ottley 1904, 1:2.105). This confusion leads the Mart. Ascen. Isa 4.22 (and possibly 1.3) to call Isaiah’s father a prophet as well. Although κατά with the genitive can be used to indicate the topic without value judgement “concerning,” as can the Hebrew על, it more often carries a hostile sense, stronger than that of the Hebrew על (BDAG, s.v. κατά A.②ⓑ) . This is the only place in Isaiah where על is rendered by κατά with the genitive; by far the most common equivalent for על is ἐπί. Isaiah uses κατά with the genitive only eleven times, two of which are in this verse and three others of which are in similar constructions, in 13:1, 15:1, and 17:1 (Babylon, Moab, and Damascus, respectively). Note the parallel with 2:1, which uses περί with the genitive: Ὁ λόγος ὁ γενόμενος παρὰ Κυρίου πρὸς Ἠσαίαν υἱὸν Ἀμὼς περὶ τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ περὶ Ἰερουσαλήμ. Κατά is added before Jerusalem probably because Jerusalem is indeclinable (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 55). The evidence in Matthew chapter 1 indicates that indeclinable names tend to take the article in the dative and accusative cases and omit it in nominative and genitive cases. In place of Hebrew ימי “days” βασιλείᾳ is found (here “reign” rather than “kingdom”) for no evident reason. To improve the Greek style, καί is added between the kings’ names. Οἱ ἐβασίλευσαν represents מלכי,
reading the yod as a waw. In most manuscripts, OI can be understood as the relative pronoun, as the accentuation added to B confirms. The phrase τῆς Ἰουδαίας is in the genitive because βασιλεύω takes the genitive of the subjects ruled. The early Christian interpreters emphasized the supernatural aspect of prophetic “vision.” Origen mentioned the incomprehensibility of “the vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw” in expounding the “well of vision” of Gen 23:11. Eusebius called this “vision” not with eyes, but prophetic, “as the divine Spirit shone upon his soul” (1.1) (McKinion 2004, 3). His comments on the unity of the book are worth quoting: “The reader should notice that the book as a whole appears to have been joined together into a unity, and [that the message] was delivered by the prophet in parts over the duration of several lengthy intervals of time, so that [the book appears] to offer little precise information about the [events that] are to arise. [Isaiah wrote in this fashion in order that] the interpretation of the [prophecies] recorded therein [could be] determined after a while and [so that] the prophecy [would also be] applicable to the events that occurred during each kingdom. After a fifty year period, the time of the appointed kings had been completed, in alignment with what has been said and conveyed through the whole book.” Chrysostom said the prophets “have said nothing on their own initiative … their words are divine oracles and their writings have come down from heaven” (Wilken 2007, 17); “the words come from the hand of God who holds the pen.” The prophecy is about the future: “the souls of the prophets when illuminated by the gift of the Spirit had access to the future” (Wilken 2007, 19). Cyril said the prophets “had knowledge of what was going to happen in the future, since these things had been revealed to them by the Holy Spirit,” but also that “they were informed about the things that were happening in their own time of which they were spectators.” Isaiah “was able to see with the eye of the mind what was going to happen to Judah at a later time.” He saw enemies and war, and “it is to these things that the beginning of the prophecy refers” (Wilken 2007, 19). In Eusebius’ view, the mention of the four kings indicates that the prophecy is against the Jewish nation (1.3). He began with those closest to him, and then moved to prophesying against Babylon and Egypt (1.3). Chrysostom
acknowledged that the kings are named “so that the diligent reader will know the history of that time. If one understands the situation and the remedies that the prophets applied to the trials of the Israelites, the prophecy will be clearer and more understandable” (Wilken 2007, 19). Eusebius called Isaiah an “evangelist,” since he “performed the same duty as the evangelists. For he preaches the Son of God surpassingly” (1.2), referring to the prophecies of the virgin birth (7:14) and the resurrection.
The first vision opens with words that anticipate Isa 6:9-10, with its theme of listening without comprehending. The totality of the created order is called as legal witnesses to the fairness of the Lord’s judgment. The prophet implies Israel’s moral capacity is below that of irrational creatures, who at least are able to acknowledge their masters. In Greek, heaven is addressed with the singular οὐρανέalthough the Hebrew is plural. The verbἐνωτίζου “give ear” is etymologically related to ὦταears. Κύριος is capitalized because it appears to be considered a proper name, judging by the lack of article. See the discussion on Κύριος in the Introduction. See Exod. 21:28, 29, 36; 22:10-11, 13-14 for κύριος as owner of a ταῦρος. Clement of Alexandria Protr. 10 used this passage to argue that God seeks his creatures. See also Paed. 1.9, Strom. 5.8, and Strom. 4.26, where he said “heaven” refers to the one who contemplates heaven. But Eusebius did not treat “heaven” and “earth” as metaphors; they can hear because they actually have souls (1.5).
2 This very first “vision” has Lord speaking directly. Justin quoted 1:3, 4, 8 to show the Father can be the speaker in prophecy: Ἔγνω βοῦς τὸν κτησάμενον καὶ ὄνος τὴν φάτνην τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ, Ἰσραὴλ δέ με οὐκ ἔγνω καὶ ὁ λαός μου οὐ συνῆκεν. Οὐαὶ ἔθνος ἁμαρτωλόν, λαὸς πλήρης ἁμαρτιῶν, σπέρμα πονηρόν, υἱοὶ ἄνομοι· ἐγκατελίπετε τὸν κύριον. Eusebius likewise took this example of divine speech as an opportunity to explain how prophecy works: “The divine Spirit filled the soul of the prophet with the appropriate power and uttered through the prophetic mouth as through an instrument the things that had been appointed and prepared in advance for the hearers of the words spoken by the Lord” (1.5). To explain ἐγέννησαScholz and Lowth suggested that G read ילדתי for גדלתי, but Ottley appealed to Ezek 31:4 ἐξέθρεψα as a parallel, where Lord begat and exalted sons. Acts 13:17 has a verbal allusion to ὕψωσα in τὸν λαὸν ὕψωσεν ἐν τῇ παροικίᾳ ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτου, raising the people up in the land of Egypt. (Minuscule 93 has ἐδόξασα.) Eusebius interpreted begetting sons as the creation of Adam and
Eve, created “according to his image,” with rational souls and a γέρους ἐξαιρέτου (“special prerogative?” 1.6). But he also said those deemed worthy to be called the people of God have been honored by the appellation “sons” (1.7), and these are the Gentiles who “will understand,” in contrast to Israel, who “will not understand.” He claimed that, the Holy Spirit reckons the Jewish nation “miserable and the worst of all the nations” for not recognizing the love of God (1.8) and for “abandoning” the Lord Christ (1.10); pride in one’s lineage is folly (1.9) Chrysostom interpreted begetting sons as an act of adoption, a “special act of grace by which they become God’s children,” which in the New Covenant is “the bath of regeneration,” baptism. Cyril said Israel was by grace made worthy to be treated as God’s children, and through faith in Christ, “we have experienced the true spiritual rebirth, begotten by water and the Spirit,” quoting Gal 4:6. These children were not only begotten, but also cared for. Israel was nurtured spiritually by the law and the prophets, to lead to the knowledge of Christ, quoting Gal 3:24. Athanasius said humans were “disinherited because of their rebellion,” and Pharisees are no longer children. The Arians against whom Alexander wrote (1.3) used 1:2 to argue that humans could become sons of God; see also 1:8. Ottley said the usual emphatic force of the nominative third person personal pronoun αὐτοί is “hard to perceive” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:396). ἀθετέω is one of Greek Isaiah’s favourite words. It usually translates בגד, and (as here) it is the normal translation of פשׁע as well. It is used of treaty-breaking and promise-breaking, here with an accusative for the person mistreated, as in Polybius, Histories 9.36.10 and Mark 6:26 in the story of Salome.
3 Israel does not know Lord, the people still do not understand him. Irenaeus (Haer. 1.19.1) quoted 1:3 against the heretics, insisting that the one not known was the Creator, God the Father. See also 4.2.1 and 4.41.2, where those who do not do God’s works are not his children. The noun βοῦς here is a singular (rather than plural accusative) because the sentence requires a nominative subject. The aorist participle of κτάομαι“acquire” is naturally translated “owner.” This is the passage from which the ox and donkey appear in manger (φάτνη) scenes, as models of those who know Lord, in contrast to his people, Israel, who rejects him. Jerome (Epist. 108.10) mentioned “the inn made sacred by the virgin and the stall where the ox knew his owner and the ass his master’s crib.” The noun κυρίου in this single instance in G translates not the tetragrammaton but בעל, “master.” The Hebrew preposition ב, in this case marking the direct object, is rendered with the accusative με, rather than with the literal ἐν. Eusebius insisted on reading not συνῆκεν but συνήσει (Comm. Isa. 1.7), even though the Hebrew has a qatal and Ziegler mentioned no support for the future in either apparatus. The identity
of the accused appears clear enough: Lord’s people Israel. Yet what early Christian interpreters considered open for interpretation is which generation of Israel is in view. Lactantius, Inst. 4.11 saw 1:2-3 referring to the Jews at the time of Christ. Eusebius (1.7) supposed there was an allusion to Christ as well. In Marc. 3.23, Tertullian took the referent to be the period from Tiberius to Vespasian. Barn. 9.3 used 1:2 to argue that God has circumcised the ears of Christians, with the words Ἄκουε οὐρανέ, καὶ ἐνωτίζου γῆ, ὅτι Κύριος ἐλάλησεν ταῦτα εἰς μαρτύριον. Tertullian, Adv. Jud. 3 said circumcision was to distinguish the Jews so that they could be excluded from Jerusalem, as had happened in his day.
The prophecy shifts from addressing the witnesses to addressing the people directly. Their sin has angered Lord, but the consequences can still be stopped. The cause of the punishments listed here is explained in 1:10-15.
4 The nominative case of ἔθνος is to be expected with οὐαί, which more commonly takes the nominative (14 times) than the dative (7 times) in Isaiah. οὐαί with the dative is by far more common in Isaiah than elsewhere in the LXX (Ezek 13 and Sirach have two instances each). σπέρμα πονηρόν are also nominative, like ἔθνος, λαός, and υἱοὶἄνομοι. This phrase appears only elsewhere in 14:20. Thackeray (1978, sec. 17.2) notes the rarity of the non-sigmatic first aorist of ἐγκαταλείπω, which also appears in Sir 41:8. The second person address ἐγκατελίπατε suggests that although the words υἱοὶἄνομοι are grammatically nominative, they are semantically vocative. The “people” here were understood by the early Christians as the Jews, the Lord’s “sons,” provoking him by their sins. Eusebius commented, “they did not understand the Christ of God who dwelt among them” (1.11), and he claimed the distress refers to the Roman siege (1.11). The article is present on τὸν κύριον, hence the translation “the lord” not as a proper noun (as it was in 1:2) but as a common noun. See the discussion “Lord” in the Introduction. The Hebrew direct object marker does appear here, but it is not a reliable predictor of when the translator adds τόν, especially in the latter half of Isaiah.
For our English translation, the principle followed is that the earliest intelligible text is to be translated. The words נזרו אחור have no equivalent in G, although Aquila included them as οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ ὁλοκληρία, and they are under asterisk in 48. Mirjam van der Vorm-Croughs commented, “According to e.g. Duhm, Ziegler, and Watts the Isaiah translator may not have read נזרו אחור in his Hebrew manuscript, as ‘the two words appear to exceed the metric form and the compact composition and probably should be judged a gloss.’ In Ziegler’s view the words may have entered the MT version from Isa 42:17 (נסגו אחור). The Qumran manuscripts of Isaiah agree with the MT, however. Hence, it seems more likely to me that the translator omitted the clause in order to shorten the text, because in content נזרו אחור is close to the two preceding lines” (2010, 378), referring to Duhm (1892, 3), Ziegler (1934, 53), and Watts (1998, 14).
5 Because πληγῆτε is an aorist passive subjunctive (of πλήσσω), I translate it as a rhetorical question, “should you be struck.” The Hebrew נכה usually is translated πατάσσω in the OG, as also in a couple of other places in Isaiah. προστίθημι is used here in the sense of “increase” as in Luke 17:5. The participle προστιθέντες indicates the reason for being struck.
A natural reading of the directional preposition εἰς would be that it indicates the fate of the head and heart, but Eusebius understood that the head and heart have an incurable disease (1.11), interpreting this as a prophecy of the Roman siege.
6 The negation in 1:6 is difficult, with a nominative string of three kinds of injury each preceded by οὔτε, followed by three kinds of treatment (neuter nouns, presumably in the accusative), each also preceded by οὔτε, except the first, which has οὐκ ἔστιν. The string of nominatives should normally be interpreted as the subject of the verb οὐκ ἔστιν, and therefore would as indicating the absence of the injuries: “from feet to head there is neither a wound nor a bruise nor a purulent blow, to put on emollient or oil or bandages.” In context, however, this expression must indicate the total absence of treatment, not even for the kinds of injuries listed, hence the translation of ἐπιθεῖναι as “one can treat.” The noun μώλωψ appears only here and Isa 53:5, both translating חַבּוּרָה, precedented by Gen 4:23; Exod 21:25. This is the deserved punishment (Deut 28:59-61) borne by the servant in Isa 53.
As in the rest of Isaiah 1-39, God fights against Israel; this is in contrast to Isaiah 40-66 where God takes initiatives on their behalf. The addressees are guilty—as guilty as Sodom and Gomorrah; they deserve the same fate. Eusebius wrote, “they burned with impiety, like the men who lived in Sodom and Gomorrah, and on account of the similarity of their lifestyle” (1.15). It is only God’s grace that prevented that same fate.
7 First, the desolation of the land is described by means of adjectives. The first, ἔρημος, tends to be used substantivally rather than attributively in Isaiah. This can be demonstrated by the grammatical mismatch in 5:9 (plural subject but singular ἔρημος) and 15:6 (neuter subject but feminine ἔρημος). The pronoun αὐτήν refers to the noun τὴν χώραν. In keeping with the verbless clauses describing the present situation, the perfect ἠρήμωται is used rather than the aorist ἠρημώθη. Likewise, the feminine passive participle of καταστρέφω is in the perfect tense. G turns the Hebrew שְׂרוף אש into a compound word (see also 9:5; 64:10). Finally, a present tense verb κατεσθίουσιν provides the time frame for the preceding list of adjectives. Justin Martyr (1 Apol. 47) took this as a prophecy that Jesus and his followers would be killed, and Cyprian that the Jews would lose Jerusalem and leave their land.
8 The future verb ἐγκαταλειφθήσεται indicates the desolation is to continue. This is
the first mention of a vineyard, an image that gets developed in chapters 5 and 27. Eusebius (1.12) recognized the vineyard here as the same one mentioned in 5:7: the entire nation. The hut is then the temple. ὀπωροφυλάκιον occurs also in 24:20, also translating מלונה. In Ps 78:1 and Micah 1:6 and 3:12, it translates עי. The present tense of πολιορκουμένη refers to a city in the process of being besieged. According to Irenaeus, the administration of the Jews was temporary. Tertullian said they should be prohibited from entering the holy city, that hardly anyone knows God (Marc. 4.24), they rejected the invitation to Christ (Marc. 4.31) and Jerusalem was left deserted by the escape of the cherubim (Marc. 4.42). Eusebius noticed the abandonment of the Lord in 1:4 is paralleled by the abandonment by the Lord in 1:5-6. The abandonment is the siege of Jerusalem, leaving the area and nation a wilderness (1.13).
9 The conditional is a classic example of a second-class contrary to fact conditional (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.2). The aorist tense in both the protasis and apodosis assumes that God had indeed left a seed. Unlike the other prophets, G transliterates צְבָאוֹת as σαβαώθ. The phrase ἐγκατέλιπεν ἡμῖν σπέρμα recalls Deut 3:3 ἐπατάξαμεν αὐτὸν ἕως τοῦ μὴ καταλιπεῖν αὐτοῦ σπέρμα, regarding Og of Bashan. As in Deut 3:3, σπέρμα translates שׂריד (in its only occurrence in Isaiah), which is usually translated by a form of σῴζω. Σόδομα is not feminine singular but neuter plural (its genitive is Σοδόμων in 1:10). Although the function of λαός is vocative, the nominative form is used. Isa 1:9 is quoted in Romans 9:29, with the implication that Isaiah was speaking to Paul’s situation. It is also quoted by Justin Martyr (1 Apol. 53 and Dial. 140). The overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah is mentioned in Matt 10:15; Luke 10:12; Jude 7; Rev 11:7-8. Revelation 11:8 notably alludes to Isa 1:9 by designating name Sodom as “spiritual” (metaphorical): καὶ τὸ πτῶμα αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τῆς πλατείας τῆς πόλεως τῆς μεγάλης, ἥτις καλεῖται πνευματικῶς Σόδομα καὶ Αἴγυπτος, ὅπου καὶ ὁ κύριος αὐτῶν ἐσταυρώθη. Eusebius took the “seed” to refer to the apostles (1.14), berating the “children of the Jews” for boasting in their ancestors’ virtue, claiming their wickedness was equal to that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
10
The Sodom and Gomorrah symbolism is extended beyond the simile of 1:9, directly calling the nation Sodom and Gomorrah. If it had not been for Lord’s mercy, they would have suffered the same fate as those notorious cities, implying that their sins were equally grievous. Addressing the people as those cities makes the point even more vividly. προσέχετε “pay attention” translates אזן as in 1:2; there it was rendered ἐνωτίζου. In translating אלהינו as θεοῦ, G apparently ignored the suffix (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 232). The nominative form λαός is used with a vocative function. Barnabas 9.3 quotes Isa 1:10 as Ἀκούσατε λόγον κυρίου, ἄρχοντες τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, changing Sodom to “this people.” TheAmherst Papyrus of the Mart. Ascen. Isa. 3.10 refers to this passage: καὶ τὴν Ἱ(ε)ρουσαλὴμ Σόδο(μ)α ἐκάλεσεν, κ(αὶ τοὺς) ἄρχοντα(ς Ἰούδα) καὶ Ἰσραὴλ (λαὸν Γο)μόρρας πρ(οσηγό)ρευσεν.
11 If in 1:10 the desired behaviour is expressed; the implication is that the behaviour expressed in 1:11 is what has been happening instead. Presumably, the people have been sacrificing animals without listening to what God said. Because πλήρης takes its complement in the genitive, ὁλοκαυτωμάτωνis what God was full of. The accusative objects of βούλομαι are στέαρ and αἷμα. The phrase ταύρων καὶ τράγων recalls Deut 32:14, which reads, βούτυρον βοῶν καὶ γάλα προβάτων μετὰ στέατος ἀρνῶν καὶ κριῶν, υἱῶν ταύρων καὶ τράγων μετὰ στέατος νεφρῶν πυροῦ, καὶ αἷμα σταφυλῆς ἔπιον οἶνον. Hebrews 10:4 borrows a phrase from Isa 1:11: ἀδύνατον γὰρ αἷμα ταύρων καὶ τράγων ἀφαιρεῖν ἁμαρτίας. Barnabas 2.5 has a few minor changes (from κριῶν, ἐὰν, τὴν αὐλὴν μου, καὶ ἡμέραν μεγάλην). Underlining indicates verbatim agreement; breaks in the underlining indicate
12 God continues expressing disdain for ritual behaviour, this time for appearing in the temple. The conditional introduced by ἂν uses the subjunctive (of ἔρχομαι) ἔρχησθε. The reality of such third-class conditionals is indeterminate, simply presenting a hypothetical situation (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.3). The passive of ὁράω with the dative “appear to” is popular with Luke; see Acts 7:26, 30, 35. Robertson wondered if the passive is causative here in ὀφθῆναί μοι and in Acts 26:16. Typically, מִן is the Hebrew word behind ἐκ, although מִן just as often is translated ἀπό, as in 1:15.
13 Flour, incense, and holy days are not what God seeks. προστίθημι is a standard translation of יסף, the Hebrew way of expressing continuation. The word for fine flour, σεμίδαλιν, usually is a translation of סלת, but here it is from מנחה, which is usually translated θυσία. The word for fasting, νηστείαν, usually is a translation of צום, but here it is from און “iniquity” (MT and 1QIsaa), which is usually translated ἀνομία. Lowth suggested G misread צום for און, which is likely, since G would not miss a chance to use ἀνομία; he has a tendency to use ἀνομία even when it is not derivable from the Hebrew (Seeligmann 2004, 272). The word ἀργίαν is formed from the alpha privative on ἐργία, so the meaning is the absence of work. In this context, a holiday is in view, even though this is not the common meaning of ἀργία.
14 The word ἀνήσω is from ἀνίημι, “give up” translating נשא (which is usually translated by αἴρω), as also in 2:9; 42:2; 46:4. Ottley suggested ἀνοίσω, which fits נשא better, and sounds similar to ἀνήσω, but this too translates נשא only four times in Isaiah. Silva translated ἑορτή as “holidays” with a note: “Or rest; possible idleness.” Silva translated ἐγενήθητέ μοι εἰς πλησμονήν “You have made me full,” with a note: “Or You have become repugnant to me.” The preposition εἰς
translates the Hebrew preposition ל, which otherwise is often represented by the dative case. The phrase τὰς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν has no counterpart in Hebrew. Van der Vorm-Croughs categorized this as an addition of a nominal object, which is “formed of words that appear in the surrounding, or that are parallel to expressions in a neighbouring clause” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 103).
15 The verb ἀποστρέψω translates אַעְלִים, “hide.” Τypically, מִן is the Hebrew counterpart to ἀπό, although מִן just as often is translated ἐκ, as in 1:12. Eusebius, Comm. Isa. 1.16 said regarding the “rulers of the nations” at the time of the Savior, that “their hands were full of blood through the murder against the Christ”; he claimed the text says, “I will no longer forgive your sins” (see also 1.17). The theme of God refusing to hear the prayers of certain people appears also in Matthew 6:7 and John 9:31. Matthew uses ἐὰν πληθύνητε τὴν δέησιν, οὐκ εἰσακούσομαι ὑμῶν, and John has ἁμαρτωλῶν ὁ θεὸς οὐκ ἀκούει. Philo said much the same thing in Spec. 1.271, that God has no desire for physical offerings.
The message of this paragraph is that Lord requires justice; repentance brings prosperity; refusal brings destruction. The early Christians applied this paragraph to Christians in their own day. Clement of Rome (1 Clem. 8.4) quoted 1:16-20, explaining that God wanted those he loved to have an opportunity to repent, so “let us obey his great and glorious will,” but four variants appear in the manuscripts (Hatch 1889, 177). Origen said, “Unless you were washed in this way, you cannot put on the Lord Jesus Christ,” quoting Rom 13:14. The “washing” is on one hand, removing wicked deeds from one’s soul (Didymus), but also the grace of Baptism, according to Eusebius, who quoted from Tit 3:5 in his commentary (1.7), and Gregory of Nyssa (Wilken 2007, 26). Tertullian associated this passage with John 4:23-24: “We are the true worshipers and true priests, who, praying in spirit, offer a spiritual sacrifice, an offering fitting and acceptable to God.”
16 Just as the answer to physical bloody hands is washing, so the solution to metaphorical bloody hands is to clean them, which takes the form of removing (aorist imperative of ἀφαιρέω) vices (1:16). The phrase ἀπὸ τῶν ψυχῶν is a translation of מעלליכם. Govett (1841) suggested G read מעל לביכם. Consistency in the English rendering of ψυχή is elusive, since “soul” and “self” each carry connotations not carried by ψυχή. The phrase παύσασθε ἀπό translates one Hebrew word, חדלו because παύω usually is followed by a preposition. Cyril of Jerusalem
took 1:16 as a command to the people of his own day to repent. “He asked that we offer this sacrifice, and he foresaw that we would do so.” Similarly, Augustine explained, “God seeks us, not what belongs to us,” and “we are told to spend money on the needy,” connecting this passage with Luke 6:37-38, and Aphrahat wrote as if Isaiah were answering the questions of the people. Didymus said, “to such as these, the Lord speaks through Isaiah” (Wilken 2007, 27).
17The solution to the bloody hands continues with the aorist imperatives of μανθάνω, ἐκζητέω, ῥύομαι, κρίνω, and δικαιόω. Removing vices entails replacing them with goodness and altrusitic fairness. The Hebrew causative היטב is rendered with an auxiliary verb καλὸν ποιεῖν. Κρίσιν in G is typically (e.g., 1:21; 1:24; 5:7; 10:2; 11:4; 33:5; 56:1; 58:2; 59:4; 59:9; 59:11; 59:14; 63:1) a desirable thing because of its fairness, so “fair judgement” or “justice” is preferable to simply “judgment,” because in English “judgment” carries negative connotations of punishment (as it hardly ever does in G; possible exceptions are Isa 4:4; 40:27; 54:17).Ottley noted the dative ὀρφανῷ is unusual with κρίνω, but it is found also in Ps 10:18 (9:39) and again in Isa 1:23. The dative χήρᾳ (like ὀρφανῷ) is found in the original hand of Vaticanus, as well as one manuscript of 1 Clement 8.4 (Ottley). BDAG lists in its own category this single use of κρίνω with dative of advantage, as quoted by 1 Clem. 8:4. The dative with κρίνω might seem to occur also in 1 Cor 11:13, but this dative is part of the prepositional phrase ἐν ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς, not a dative of advantage, given its placement after ὑμῖν rather than after κρίνατε. If the accusative had been used with κρίνω, it would imply condemnation rather than a judgement in favour of the orphan. Note ὀρφανῷ and χήραν are both anarthous. The allusion in Matt 23:23 is not verbal, but they share the view that good deeds are more desireable than ritual observance. The image of red and white corresponding to wickedness and purity is found in Rev 17:4.
18 The washing metaphor continues with Lord’s offer to negotiate generously. He is not interested in punishment; he desires reconciliation. The verb διελέγχω normally has the sense of an adversarial dispute to discern right from wrong, except possibly in the two LXX instances. The aorist passive in this sense also appears in Micah 6:2. Grammatically, the puzzle is that it is passive in form and first person plural. How can only one of the parties be convicted or refuted when both are the subject “we”? It is best therefore to interpret it in a middle sense without a result in view. φοινικοῦν refers to a red purple (Danker 1992) derived from shellfish. The conjunction δέ appears with no Hebrew basis, as it does some 40 times in G.
Lord offers to turn two kinds of red, symbolizing vices, into two examples of whiteness (symbolizing fairness). Κόκκινον is a cheaper, lighter scarlet red than φοινικοῦς. On the basis of 1:18, Basil of Caesarea said the great physician of souls “is ready to deliver not you alone, but all who are enslaved by sin” (Wilken 2007, 28).
19 The promise of reconciliation to Lord instead of rebellion is prosperity, but the recipients must be willing, a sentiment expressed through the intransitive use of θέλω.
20 Unwillingness is shown by not listening. Instead of εἰσακούσητε one would expect a form of ἀπειθέω for מרה as in 50:5 and also 3:8; 63:10; cf. 30:9. As it stands, the two paths in 1:19-20 are more obviously contrasted. The consequence of not listening is being devoured (κατεσθίω) by a short sword μάχαιρα, symbolizing a violent death. Κατεσθίω can form its future as either κατέδομαι or the Hellenestic καταφάγομαι (BDF sec. 74(2)). The oracle ends with the formula τὸ γὰρ στόμα κυρίου ἐλάλησεν ταῦτα. The corresponding Hebrew כי פי יהוה דבר appears also in Isa 40:5; 58:14. The addition of ταῦτα also occurs in Isa 58:14. Eusebius (Comm. Isa. 1.18) found the fulfilment of 1:20 in the Roman invasion; he said, “These predictions were in fact fulfilled at once after they were delivered. Those among the aforementioned rulers and Jewish people who did not listen to the saving grace were immediately (not after a long while!) delivered to the sword of the enemy—the Romans, who invaded them and conquered everywhere with the law of war. … They were delivered even to this [fate] because they were disobedient to the calling of the grace of Christ.” But Eusebius did not identify the “wronged” man as Jesus.
21 A new prophecy laments Zion’s immoral practices. Van der Vorm-Croughs noted alliteration here: the beginning repetition of the κ in κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν, and κρίνοντες καὶ κρίσιν χήρας; the ἀ in ἄρχοντές σου ἀπειθοῦσιν and the chiastic α δ in ἀγαπῶντες δῶρα, διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 178). Because πιστὴ Σιών is more definite than πόρνη πόλις, the subject of πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιώνis “faithful Zion” and the complement is “an immoral city.” The name Σιών has no counterpart in the Hebrew. Justice “slept” (κοιμάω) in this city when it was faithful, before it became immoral, so sleeping there must be understood as lodging there. The phrase ἐν ᾗ was added to the translation, resulting in smoother Greek, since turning this clause (which is independent in
the Hebrew) into a relative clause provides a hypotactic rather than paratactic structure.
22 Verses 22 and 23 continue listing various ways Zion is untrustworthy. In commerce, neither buyers nor sellers can be trusted. Their money is ἀδόκιμον, which etymologically would mean unapproved; Ottley added αἱ πόλεις ὑμῶν πυρίκαυστοι in square brackets because A repeats a clause here from 1:7. A κάπηλος is a small businessman, but with a negative cheating connotation. Modern English has comparable words “dealer” or “peddlar.” But often, especially in the context of mixing drinks, it refers to a tavern keeper. The Hebrew uses a passive construction, not specifying who is doing the mixing. Thackeray (23.2) noted that μείγνυμι does not occur in the active; μίσγω is used instead (Thackeray 1978, 246). Although the normal Greek word for wine, οἶνος is used here, the Hebrew has an unusual word סבא. Eusebius said the formerly faithful city was probably Jerusalem at the time of David (1.19) because that is when faithful people built it. It was “faithful” because it was “full of justice” and “righteousness.” But Eusebius said 1:22 “could be interpreted in harmony with the above statements about the times of our Savior,” so that the worthless money (of the fornicators, thieves, and murderers) would refer to the Jewish δευτερώσεις μύθικας apocryphal “myths” of Titus 1:14 and 1 Tim 4:7 (1.19). They are thieves for their complicity with Judas (1.20).
23 The unfaithfulness of Zion is focused in the rulers, in 1:23. ἀπειθέω (opposite of πείθομαι) translates סרר also in Isa 65:2, where it also is translated with ἀντιλέγω. Of its 15 occurrences in Isaiah, ἀπειθέω is the translation of 8 different Hebrew roots. It is used in contexts involving resistance, overlapping in meaning with the English “rebel” “refuse” and “disobey.” Sometimes the object is personal, sometimes a way of conduct, and sometimes there is no object. Here it is the main verb; its subject applies to the other five nominative plurals in the rest of the verse. κλεπτῶν is not the nominative participle of κλέπτω, since a nominative is already present in κοινωνοί “fellows,” so it is the genitive of κλέπτης.LSJ lists only biblical references in its entry on ἀνταπόδομα. It refers to what is given in exchange, in other words “repayment,” or “recompense.” GELS lists this instance as the only example of the meaning “kick-back.” Q appears to have εὖ rather than οὐ, but other editors have not noted this. The noun κοινωνοί indicates that the following participles ἀγαπῶντες and προσέχοντες, in apposition, should be understood as substantives rather than modifying the main verb. If they were modifying the main verb, the translation could be “Your leaders break trust, companions of thieves, by loving gifts, by pursuing rewards, by happily passing judgement on orphans, and by not regarding a widow’s case.”
Justin Martyr (Dial. 82) said God reproaches (ὀνειδίζει, present tense) the rulers of the Jewish people in 1:23: Οἱ ἄρχοντες ὑμῶν κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν, φιλοῦντες δῶρα, διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα. Again in Dial. 27 he alluded to the same verse: κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν καὶ φιλοῦντες δῶρα καὶ διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα, ὀρφανοῖς οὐ κρίνοντες καὶ κρίσει χήρας οὐ προσέχοντες. The Didache (5.2) uses the expression Διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα from 1:23. Irenaeus (Haer. 4.2.6) claimed that Isaiah 1:23 spoke of the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day.
24 Lord Sabaoth proclaims he will not tolerate this unfaithfulness. He promises a restoration back to the original status (from the beginning) when Zion was a faithful city. The real master is Lord Sabaoth; he is called ὁ δεσπότης (a reading omitted in V), which typically (as here and in 3:1; 10:33) renders האדון when this Hebrew word is not suffixed (otherwise it is translated κύριος). Οὐαί is the standard transliteration of הוי. Οὐαί can also appear with the dative following. The second person “you” is implied from ἐπὶσὲin 1:25, although there it is singular. Hebrew behind the plural οἱ ἰσχύοντες is singular. The translation rearranges the words so that it is the strong ones (in the nominative) who are to dread. The Hebrew has God as the strong one of Israel, with no specific adressees. Because it is indeclinable, Ἰσραήλ could be understood as nominative (in apposition to οἱ ἰσχύοντες), or genitive. If genitive, the relationship could be subjective and partitive (those Israelites that have power) or objective (those who have power over Israel). Verses 25 and 26 indicate that Israel, not just the leaders of Israel, are being addressed. Corresponding to παύσεται the Hebrew has a first-person verb אנחם. G appears to have read a third person verb נח and then חֵמָה or חמתי. Evidently he thought the הוי was misplaced. When he moved הוי to before אביר, the lamed of Israel and aleph marking the first-person verb אנחם came together as לא, resulting in Greek οὐ (which has no counterpart in the Hebrew). אבירישראלהויאנחםמצרי was read as אבירי ישראל לא נח חמה בצרים. The Greek preposition ἐκ translates the Hebrew preposition מ in מאויבי. The awkwardness of the English translation “execute from” is intended to mimic the awkwardness of the Greek κρίσιν ποιεῖν ἐκ, although “extract from” might provide the sense better. Eusebius interpreted 1:24 to mean that the wrath will punish the rulers and the powerful of the nation (Comm. Isa. 1.21).
25 Lord Sabaoth’s justice first involves removing the unfaithful rulers. He promises to bring his hand upon (ἐπάγω) them, and make them καθαρόν, a
neuter adjective serving as abstract noun or indefinite substantive “something pure.” The sense is then of God refining his opponents. He will remove (ἀφαιρέω), them, which in this context implies doing away with them. G apparently did not know what בדיל might mean in this context (although it appears in Num 31:22 as κασσίτερος, “tin”) and since he was at loss, used ἀνόμους, a favorite stand-in of his. ἀπειθοῦντας translates a different Hebrew word סִיג than in 1:23 (סרר). Eusebius said Isa 1:25 describes a refining process by which the city, the Church of God, again becomes “full of justice,” when the remnant chosen by grace (the disciples; cf. Romans 11:5,) is among them; the judges and counselors are the apostles and disciples (1.21), and the city is now founded on a rock (Matt 7:25). This new divinely favoured government (τὸ σύστημα τοῦ θεοφιλοῦς πολιτεύματος) is what is faithful.
26 The purpose of the purging is to restore the situation back to the way it was originally (τὸ πρότερον). The transitive use of ἐφίστημι in 1:26 (which is how the present, imperfect, future, and 1st aorist active are used) is not found in the NT. The noun ἀρχή has two meanings, depending on whether it is preceded by a preposition (ἀπʼ in 1:26; 2:6; 22:11; 23:7; 42:9; 43:13; 44:8; 45:21; 48:8; 63:16; ἐξ in 19:11; 40:21; 41:26; 43:9; ἐν in 51:9), in which case it refers to time (“beginning”), or if it does not follow a preposition (9:5, 6; 10:10; 19:15; 41:27), it refers to authority. The phrase ὡς τὸ ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς appears again in Isa 2:6 and Isa 63:19. Without ὡς, the phrase τὸ ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς appears in Joshua 24:2; 2 Kgdms 14:26; Pss Sol 17:30 The expression does seem awkward, but it also appears in Demosthenes In Aristocratem 148, Ὅσα μὲν δὴ στρατιώτης ὢν ἐν σφενδονήτου καὶ ψιλοῦ μέρει τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἐναντία ἐστράτευται τῇ πόλει. The form is still second person in κληθήσῃ, but this shifts to third person in the next clause, both in Hebrew and Greek, indicating a change of addressee, and implying a change of speaker. The city is transformed into a μητρόπολις πιστή, in contrast to the πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιών of 1:21. The explicit naming of the city Σιών may have been read back into Isa 1:21. The meaning of the expression μητρόπολις πιστὴ Σιών is clearer than the earlier πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιών of 1:21, which now in retrospect, might be understood as “faithful city Zion … became a harlot.” 1 Peter 2:6 likely draws on (among other parts of Isaiah) this image of a restored city and its righteousness.
27 Verse 27 is not obviously linked to what precedes, other than the mention of judgment, the theme of restoration, and the mercy Lord is showing in restoring Zion. There has been no mention of captives or their need to escape. There is no word in MT corresponding to γάρ; G has added it to draw a causal connection between the two sentences. Along with κρίσις, κρίμα is one of the normal translations of מִשְׁפָּט. The two are synonyms for G, and are often paired
with δικαιοσύνη. Even though G does not distinguish between the two nouns from the same root, a reader would perceive a difference, in that nouns ending in –σις imply a process (judging fairly), and nouns ending in –μα imply a result (the verdict). Perhaps the translation ἡ αἰχμαλωσία is the result of G reading שִׁבְיהָ “her converts” rather than שָׁבֶיהָ (Ottley 1904, 1:2:390). Concrete “captives” are being rescued here, not the abstract “captivity,” as in Numbers 31:12; 1 Macc 9:70, 72; Judith 2:9; 1 Esdr 6:5. Eusebius understood this verse to mean that “not all will return but only those who are determined worthy. One should understand the return from captivity as the conversion of souls from error to the true knowledge of God” (Comm. Isa. 1.22; also 1.32). This verbless clause might be expected to take its verb from the preceding parallel clause’s σωθήσεται, but because that makes little sense, only the tense is drawn from that clause: “will be.”
28 The conjunction καίjoins this section to the previous. The implication is that the restoration of the righteous city involves the destruction of the sinful. The imagery conveys the inescapability of their fate. The fire imagery may have influenced Isa 33:11 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 271). G used a varied vocabulary to convey the destruction of the wicked. Although in Luke 4:18 συντρίβω refers to the oppressed, the meaning here is more like that of Romans 16:20, where Satan is crushed underfoot. It is rare for a passive form of συντελέω to have a personal subject.
so made it καί with the aorist. But the Masoretes read it differently: they pointed this as a wyiqtol, which normally becomes καί with the future in Greek. ἐπαισχύνομαι with ἐπί and the dative occurs in Romans 6:21 to refer to the thing of which one is ashamed. The imperfect ἠβούλοντο has the alternative augment ἠ-, which is commonly used not only on on θέλω, but three other verbs with related meanings: βούλομαι, δύναμαι, μέλλω. In most biblical books, the imperfect augment is ἐ-, but in Isaiah we see ἠ- in 1:29, 30:9, 15 (in B); 65:12; 66:4, and ἐ- in 30:15; 42:24; 65:12 (in QAB), 66:4 (in AB). 1 Macc is the other book with ἠ- (1 Macc 4:6; 5:48; 11:45, 49; 12:14; 15:27) (Thackeray 1978, 197–98). The aorist of βούλομαι rarely appears in the translated parts of biblical Greek (only in Exod 10:27; 1 Kgdms 22:17; 28:23; Ps 35:4; 39:9; Pr 1:10; Jer 6:10). The accusative object indicates the thing desired. It is unclear why one would be ashamed of κήποις, “gardens.” G is simply translating the Hebrew גנות. Eusebius noted, “As concerns the gardens, their fathers finished with these idolatrous practices for the most part” (1.23). The neuter relative pronoun in ἃ ἐπεθύμησαν does not match the masculine κήποις.
30 The infirmity of the lawbreakers and sinful is presented with two pairs of similes. The first pair (in 1:30) are vegetation: a leafless tree and a waterless park. τερέμινθος is the common spelling of this tree in Alexandrinus and Vaticanus, and τερέβινθος by all the uncials in Isa 1:30; 6:13; etc. (LSJ s.v. τέρμινθος). It appears in Gen 43:11 for pistachio nuts. Here we have אלה (without yod), whereas the preceding verse has אילים, translated εἰδώλοις. Because τερέβινθος is feminine, ἀποβεβληκυῖα, the perfect participle of ἀποβάλλω, is also feminine.
31 The other pair of similes are flammable: flax and sparks, indicating the wicked will be conclusively burned. Eusebius read “Their works are like sparks, in as much as their deeds are causes of fire” (1.25). στιππύον, an alternative spelling for στυππεῖον, is coarse flax fiber. It is a material that is gathered, in Sir 21:9, and it is fuel in Dan 3:46. Στιππυϊνος appears in Lev 13:47, 59 for a kind of garment, “linen.” The image effectively conveys weakness. The phrase οἱ ἄνομοι καὶ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοί makes the Hebrew phrase meaning “the two of them” explicit. The future participle of σβέννυμι by itself would refer to one who can extinguish something, hence the more idiomatic translation, “no one to extinguish it.”
2 The prophecy is introduced in an unusual way, with the word ὅτι (2:2). There is no verb of perception or communication that would demand a recitative conjunction, nor does the clause after Ὅτι offer a reason for or cause of what precedes. The adjective ἐμφανής in its nominitive neuter form matches the subject τὸ ὄρος. The phrase ἐπʼ ἄκρων τῶν ὀρέων is probably attributive rather than predicative. In other words, it is not “The house of God is on the peaks of the mountains” (predicating something about the house of God) but “The house of God that is on the peaks of the mountains” (specifying an attribute of the house of God). The translation of גבעה “hill,” is βουνός, as usual. Usually ἥκω translates בא, but here the Hebrew behind ἥξουσιν is נהר.
Matt 5:14 echoes Isa 2:2; both use mountains as symbols of universal visibility, as Matthew says, οὐ δύναται πόλις κρυβῆναι ἐπάνω ὄρους κειμένη. Acts 2:17 uses an expression that appears only in Isa 2:2, but then follows it with a quotation from Joel: καὶ ἔσται ἐν ταῖς ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις, λέγει ὁ θεός, ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ πᾶσαν σάρκα. Rev 15:4 alludes to Isa 2:2 in topic and phrasing: ὅτι πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιόν σου, ὅτι τὰ δικαιώματά σου ἐφανερώθησαν.
3 The image of the νόμος of God going out from Jerusalem (2:3) appears also in Isa 51:4. The context of νόμος in Isa 8:16, 20; 24:5, 16, and maybe 33:6 fit the Mosaic law, but in Isa 1:10; 2:3; 5:24; 42:4,24; 51:4, 7 the νόμος is more like instruction or advice or legal judgements than the “law” of Moses. For example, the word of the Lord in 1:10-18 asks them to expend less on what Moses had commanded. Isa 1:19-20 is similar to the refrain in Deuteronomy, but changes commands / decrees / ordinances to being willing and “listening” to the Lord. Notably, νόμος in 2:3 is indefinite in both Isaiah and Micah. John 4:22 possibly alludes to Isa 2:3, with its sense that salvation is from the Jews. Justin (1Apol. 39) quoted 2:3 as a prophecy of the apostles and of Christian conversion. In Dial. 24 he quoted it as evidence of a new covenant that has gone forth. Irenaeus (Haer. 4.34.4) agreed, saying the word went forth from Jerusalem by the apostles. Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 1) quoted 2:3 referring to the celestial word that comes from Zion. Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 3.8-9) said 2:3-4 is Isaiah foretelling the new law of the Christians: “Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices?” Eusebius agreed that the Christians have a new law: “Therefore, they were unwilling [to receive] the law of the New Testament, and they even provoked the living word of God” (1.39). In the Apostolic Constitutions 5, 2:3 is used to claim God’s word is transferred to the Gentiles. Origen (Cels. 5.33) considered it more like an allusion than a fulfillment, but held that it refers to Christians.
4 The subject of κρινεῖ in 2:4 is unclear. It could be the Lord, or his word, or his law. Eusebius suggested Christ might be the evangelical law, and said the evangelical word judges between the nations (1.26). The phrase λαὸν πολύν appears also in Gen 50:20; Num 21:6; Deut 20:1; Josh 17:14-17 in the sense of “many people.” In the plural, it is a
favourite expression of Micah (4:3, 13; 5:6, 7). This instance of συγκόψουσιν is the only occurrence of συγκόπτω “break up” in Isaiah. Here it translates כתת, as in Deut 9:21. In 4 Kingdoms, it translates קצץ. Muraoka’s entry on ζιβύνη (GELS) indicates that this kind of spear can also be spelled with σ-, and appears in parallel with μάχαιρα in Isa 2:4; δόρυ in Mic 4:3, τόξον in Jer 6:23, έγχειρίδιον in Jer 27:42. A δρέπανον is an implement with a curved blade, normally a farm tool, but also a weapon in Herodotus, Hist. 5.112.2. G uses the subjunctive οὐ μὴ μάθωσιν rather than the future used for λήμψεται. λαμβάνω (148 times) is not quite as commonly used as αἴρω for נשׂא (185 times in OG).
The need for an invitation to return to Lord is explained by the separation between Lord and his people, and the reason for this ruptured relationship. Foreign influences are the problem: omens, offspring, wealth, military, and objects of worship have all come in from outside.
5 The function of οἶκος is vocative, although the form is nominative. Isa 50:11 has an expression similar to πορευθῶμεν τῷ φωτὶ in πορεύεσθε τῷ φωτὶ. Instead of an accusative, which would express motion towards, we find a dative. Whether this dative is locative or instrumental, the meaning is the same: the light of Lord illuminates one’s path. Justin (Dial. 135) quoted 2:5 to the effect that the Jews have been rejected, with the words Καὶ νῦν σὺ οἶκος τοῦ Ἰακὼβ, δεῦρο καὶ πορευθῶμεν ἐν φωτὶ κυρίου· ἀνῆκε γὰρ τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, τὸν οἶκον Ἰακὼβ, ὅτι ἐπλήσθη ἡ χώρα αὐτῶν, ὡς τὸ ἀπαρχῆς, μαντειῶν καὶ κληδονισμῶν.
6 The verb ἀνῆκεν is from ἀνίημι, which is not forgive but abandon or “let go,” translating נטשׁ. נטשׁ in Isaiah is usually translated ἐγκαταλείπω, which would fit here as well. Presumably κύριος from the end of the preceding verse is the subject. The object, τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, is in apposition with τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ. The subject of ἐνεπλήσθη (from ἐμπίπλημι) is χώρα. The phrase ἡ χώρα αὐτῶν has no equivalent in the Hebrew. The expression τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς is adverbial, indicating when the place was filled with omens. The feminine noun elided in ἡ τῶνἀλλοφύλων is χώρα from the first half of the comparison. The meaning of the noun χώρα overlaps with “land,” “region,” and “country,” but I have chosen “territory” as a standard replacement for χώρα because “land” overlaps better with γῆ, “region” lacks the clear boundaries implied by χώρα, and “country” implies too much socially: nationality and belonging. The territory is full of κληδονισμῶν, “soothsaying”; κληδονισμός “diviner” here translates ענן, from a reading of
Deut 18:14, also in plural. In Isa 57:3 ענן becomes ἄνομος. ἀλλόφυλος is a translation of פְּלִשְׁתִּי, and here also of נָכְרִי. Note that ἐγενήθη is from γίνομαι, not γεννάω.
7 The past tense of ἦν likely was chosen simply to suit the context, in which case its similarity in sound to אַיִן is entirely coincidental.
8 The noun phrase τῶν ἔργων is not in apposition with βδελυγμάτων because βδελυγμάτων has no article, yet ἔργων does. Ziegler and Rahlfs have οἷς ἐποίησαν, in agreement with Q, A, and S’s corrector cb2; the case is dative by attraction to the verb προσκυνέω, which takes its object in the dative. Revelation quotes Isa 2:8, which is the only other place the exact phrase τῶν ἔργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν appears.Rev 9:20 reads, Καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, οἳ οὐκ ἀπεκτάνθησαν ἐν ταῖς πληγαῖς ταύταις, οὐδὲ μετενόησαν ἐκ τῶνἔργωντῶνχειρῶναὐτῶν, ἵνα μὴ προσκυνήσουσιν τὰ δαιμόνια καὶ τὰ εἴδωλα τὰ χρυσᾶ καὶ τὰ ἀργυρᾶ καὶ τὰ χαλκᾶ καὶ τὰ λίθινα καὶ τὰ ξύλινα, ἃ οὔτε βλέπειν δύνανται οὔτε ἀκούειν οὔτε περιπατεῖν. Cyprian (Ep. 63.1) quoted 2:8-9 to prove the importance of repentance.
9 The Greek ἔκυψεν represents the Hebrew שׁחח, which normally is translated by ταπεινόω, as in the rest of this chapter (verses 11 and 17), but that verb is used in the parallel expression, which has שׁפל. Like שׁחח , שׁפל is also normally rendered by ταπεινόω. Κύπτω “bend down” provides a more physical image. The identity of the (anarthous) person (ἄνθρωπος … ἀνήρ) is unclear. Cyprian, the only Ante-Nicene Father to quote this verse, took it to be the idolaters just mentioned (Fort. 3; Laps. 7; Letter 63.1), but he was working from Latin, where the absence of the article is not an issue. Cyril of Alexandria took it to be humanity in general (Comm.Isa.). The singular first-person subject of ἀνήσω (from ἀνίημι) must be Κύριος from 2:1, unless the subject be Isaiah. The Hebrew has a second person verb here. Perhaps the change from second person to first person was a visual error in Egyptian cursive Aramaic script, in which Aleph is shaped similarly to Taw. Aleph appears as and Taw as (Gesenius and Kautzsch 1910, xvii). Ottley suggested ἀνοίσω was intended, as in 1:14, as a translation of נשׂא. The verbs ἔκυψεν and ἐταπεινώθη continue to describe how the idolators are worshiping their idols. The passive voice of ἐταπεινώθηis used here in a middle sense.
Normally ἀνίημι takes its object in the accusative. With the accusative, the the meaning is most naturally abandonment; with the dative, forgiveness is also possible: “I will not remit them their sin,” like ἀφίημι. In Isa 2:6, the accusative is used with ἀνίημι and the affirmation is that Lord has let them go. Here the dative is used, and the statement is negative: Lord will not let them off.
10 The addressees are warned that Lord’s radiance is so overpowering as to make hiding underground attractive. Because the variant reading εἰσέλθετε for εἰσέλθατε is also an aorist imperative, there is no difference in meaning. The expression ἀπὸ προσώπου, meaning “presence,” is a literal translation of the Hebrew, but it is also attested in Greek before the LXX. BDAG cites Ctesias (5th-4th BCE): 688 Fgm. 9 Jac., which has φυγεῖν ἀπὸ προσώπου Κύρου. The phrase ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν is not represented in MT; it recurs in 2:19, and 21. ὅταν is indefinite, but “whenever” (the normal English way of indicating indefiniteness) is not appropriate because it implies multiple repeated events. 2 Thess 1:9 quotes Isa 2:10 or 19 or 21, οἵτινες δίκην τίσουσιν ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον ἀπὸπροσώπουτοῦκυρίουκαὶἀπὸτῆςδόξηςτῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ. 2 Thess 1:10 continues the borrowing (from 2:11 or 2:17) with ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐνδοξασθῆναι ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ καὶ θαυμασθῆναι ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύσασιν, ὅτι ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς, ἐντῇἡμέρᾳἐκείνῃ. Quarles argued that 2 Thess 1:9-10 identifies Christ with the Lord in Isa 2:10 (Quarles 1997). Rev 6:15 alludes to the same scriptures (Isa 2:10 or 2:21 and Isa 2:19) with its Καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς καὶ οἱ μεγιστᾶνες καὶ οἱ χιλίαρχοι καὶ οἱ πλούσιοι καὶ οἱ ἰσχυροὶ καὶ πᾶς δοῦλος καὶ ἐλεύθερος ἔκρυψαν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰςτὰςπέτρας τῶν ὀρέων. Isa 2:19 contributes the phraseεἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ.
11 The two verbless predicative clauses οἱ γὰρ ὀφθαλμοὶ κυρίου ὑψηλοί and ὁ δὲ ἄνθρωπος ταπεινός in 2:11 are not quite parallel because ἄνθρωπος is nominative but κυρίου is genitive. It is not the eyes of humanity but humanity itself that is low. Κυρίου has no counterpart in MT. Although the two words ταπεινός and ταπεινωθήσεται are cognate in Greek, in the Hebrew these two words are from different roots. The same is true for ὕψος and ὑψωθήσεται. The phrase ὕψος τῶν ἀνθρώπων refers to the high position of people. Given the common conception that monotheism is promoted in the Bible, it may be surprising to note that here in 2:11 we find one of the few pairings of Κύριος μόνος in the Greek scriptures. In Isaiah we have the identical expression in 2:17. The only others are Exod 22:19;
Deut 32:12=Odes 2:12; 1 Kgdms 7:4; 3 Kgdms 18:22; Dan 3:45; Esd B 19:6; Sir 18:2; Odes 14:26. The “day” referred to by ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ is when Lord rises, i.e., ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν.
12 The theme introduced in the preceding paragraph is the essence of this paragraph: human arrogance will be brought down. In the phrase ἡμέρα γὰρ κυρίου σαβαωθ ἐπί, the preposition ἐπί is used in a hostile sense. Because the following verbless predicative clauses are in a future context, the English translation includes “will be.” ὑβριστήνand ὑπερήφανον are synonyms, describing haughty arrogant people. The pair ὑψηλὸν καὶ μετέωρον represents only one word in the MT: נשׂא; ὑψηλόν was used of Lord in 2:11. The instance of ταπεινωθήσονται in 2:12 translates a different Hebrew word than in 2:11. Here it is שָׁפֵל there it was שׁחח. Tertullian (Marc. 4.33) recalled Isa 2:12 when condemning pride, and Cyprian (Ep. 54.3) used it to threaten punishment for the arrogant.
14 Although the adjective ὑψηλόν is not present (modifying ὄρος), there is a corresponding Hebrew word הרמים in the MT.
16 The noun θέαν is accented as θέα “sight,” not θεά “goddess.” Κάλλους is from κάλλος, ους, τό “beauty,” not the adjective καλός. Ottley’s comment is insightful: “πλοίων seems here to be a mistaken addition; the rest is not far from the Heb., ‘images,’ or ‘objects of desire’: to the root שׂכה is by many assigned the meaning ‘to see,’ so that θέα in the sense of ‘an object of sight’ is very near,
and κάλλος represents חמד also in 53:2. Cf. Plat. Resp. X. 615 A, διηγεῖσθαι θέας ἀμηχάνους τὸ κάλλος. Vulg. has here omne, quod visu pulchrum est” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:114). Van der Vorm-Croughs commented under the category she titled “Two renderings in genitival relationship reflect distinct readings or interpretations of the Hebrew” as follows: “LXX Isaiah offers two different interpretations of …: (a) a plural form … “ship” (=πλοίων); and (b) a (not attested) substantive noun from the root … (“to look at”), meaning “images” (≈ θέαν).” She noted, “Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 61. Goshen-Gottstein, on the contrary, wrote that πλοίων is a plain addition, not deriving from … (HUB Isa, 8)” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 35). This expression would most naturally have been read as “every sighting of ships of beauty,” i.e., against every appearance of a beautiful ship, which makes little sense in this context. Unfortunately Eusebius is no help because he skipped this section in his commentary, and continued directly to 2:22.
17 The verb ταπεινωθήσεται translates the same Hebrew word as in 2:11, which is not the same as in 2:12. .
See also the note on ὕψος at 2:11; the same Hebrew word רום is behind both. Again, as in 2:11, Κύριος μόνος represents one of the rare collocations of these two words. Irenaeus Haer. 4.33.13 quoted Isa 2:17 to say that after the ascension, God will cast down his opponents. See the discussion of the reception of 2:10-11 for the allusion between Isa 2:17 and 2 Th 1:10.
18 An earlier paragraph (2:10) advised the addressees to hide in the rock and ground; here they are prophesied to bring their idols with them. The case of the neuter τὰ χειροποίητα πάντα could be nominative or accusative. Because the first word of verse 19 is clearly a nominative masculine and must be the subject of κατακρύψουσιν, the neuter χειροποίητα must be the accusative object of this verb.
19 The Hebrew has only one word, במערות, where the Greek has seven: εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰς τὰς σχισμάς. The expression ἀπὸ προσώπου is rare but not unattested in Greek by this time. In any case it would be familiar to those who had read the scriptures in
Greek. The phrase ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν occurred earlier in 2:10; and this time the MT includes it. It occurs again in 2:21. Tertullian alluded to 2:19 in Marc. 4.30; 4.36 and Herm. 34. He also used it to show that the resurrection is a future event, since God has not yet shattered the earth (Res. 22). See also the discussion on the reception of 2:10-11 for the allusions to Isa 2:19 in 2 Thess 1:9 & Rev 6:15.
20 Because G was at a loss when encountering the Hebrew חפר פרה, he used one of his favourite standbys ματαίοις. G used ματαίος for twenty different words, most often תהו (4 times). In place of ἐποίησαν, Alexandrinus has the singular ἐποίησεν, to match ἄνθρωπος. See the discussion of the reception of 2:10-11 above for allusions and echoes between Isa 2:19 and 2 Thess 1:9 & Rev 6:15.
21 The reason the idols are cast out is given in 2:21; it is τοῦ εἰσελθεῖν, an infinitive of purpose. One must rid himself of all that baggage in order to flee.
22 Verse 2:22 is missing in G. Croughs wrote, “As a whole, the Greek Isaiah does not contain many of such extensive minuses, the preponderance of the units which are not represented in the translation numbering not more than
three words” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 380). This verse is present in 1QIsaa, so despite Eugene Ulrich (2001, 292–93), Arie van der Kooij argued that it was omitted by G intentionally (2006b).
1 The relation of the section beginning chapter 3 to what precedes is unclear. On one hand, the cessation of the refrain about shattering the earth indicates a new oracle begins here. On the other hand, there is no explicit introduction beyond Ἰδοὺδή (3:1), and there is some thematic continuity. The future of Judea’s leadership is in question; the removal of these leaders could easily take place at “that day” of chapter 2. Ἰδού is the standard translation of הנה. It does more than point to something; it draws the hearers’ attention. Although particles are not common in G; δή appears here as the standard equivalent of נא. δή occurs most commonly in the books of Judges to 4 Kingdoms, and also in the minor prophets. The word האדון only appears in Isaiah and Malachi 3:1. Isaiah uses it only as part of the phrase האדון יהוה צבאות, in Isa 1:24; 3:1; 10:33 rendered ὁ δεσπότης Κύριος Σαβαώθ, and in 10:16; 19:4 as just Κύριος Σαβαώθ. The future ἀφελεῖ (ἀφαιρέω) is translated here from the Hifil participle of סר. Ἰουδαίας represents יהודה. In the LXX, only 45 times of 806 is יהודה rendered Ἰουδαία. Over half of those are in Isaiah; the others are in Psalms, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, 2 Chronicles, Esdras B, and Zechariah. Normally יהודה becomes Ἰούδας; 156 times it is indeclinable Ιουδα. However, in Isaiah, יהודה becomes Ἰουδαία 12 times, Ἰούδας 13 times, Ιουδα 2 times, and Ἰουδαῖος once. In Codex Vaticanus, Jerusalem and Judea are reversed. Cyprian (Test. 1.21-22) interpreted the strength of bread and water to mean that “the Jews would lose while we should receive the bread and the cup of Christ.” Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13; Marc. 2.23; 5.8) saw in 3:1, 3 a prophecy that God would take away the Holy Spirit from Jerusalem, but in Marc. 5.6 he interpreted the builder as Paul.
2 Silva translated γίγαντα as “mighty one” with a footnote: “Or giant.” ἄνθρωπον (“a warrior person”) is present in the Greek because the Hebrew has איש מלחמה. The καὶs in this chain are linking separate nouns, not adjectives all modifying one noun, so instead of “a powerful and warrior person” with the correction the English would be “a powerful man and a warrior person.” The word στοχαστής is unattested earlier than G. LSJ offers the gloss “diviner” (i.e., of the future, in Josephus, War 4.289),
but the root concerns guessing more broadly. Philo used it three times, (Opif. 45; Spec. 1.61; Praem. 46) in the sense of guessing or conjecturing. See also Agatharchides De mari Erythraeo, 8 (2nd C. BCE).
3 In MT, the “amazing” and “counsellor” are separated by a disjunctive accent וּנְשׂ֣וּא פָנִ֑ים וְיוֹעֵ֛ץ and therefore refer to two people, but θαυμαστόν σύμβουλον indicates one amazing counsellor. The Greek words used for the “wonderful counsellor,” פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ of 9:5(6) are not the same: Μεγάλης βουλῆς. The phrase συνετὸν ἀκροατήν refers to an “intelligent student” (a “hearer” in James 1:23-25). G apparently did not understand לחש (the word does not appear in the Pentateuch); the two other times he had to deal with it he either left it out (3:20), or took it as an adjective μικρός (26:16). Paul in 1 Cor 3:10 used a phrase from Isa 3:3, in Κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι ὡς σοφὸς ἀρχιτέκτων θεμέλιον ἔθηκα, ἄλλος δὲ ἐποικοδομεῖ. Theodoret mentioned the “excellent councillor” in his letter To an Unknown Correspondent. Origen quoted 3:1-3 to show that the Christ divorced the synagogue, since the Jews are no longer able to keep their commandments, such as stoning, and those requiring the temple (Comm. Matt. 14.19). For more on the history of this verse see Stegmüller’s work (1967).
4 The future of ἐφίστημι (3:4) is causal, and when ἐφίστημι has double accusative objects, one of the objects is established as the other.The noun ἐμπαίκτης is related to the verb ἐμπαίζω “ridicule,” hence “ridiculers,” but תַּעֲלוּלִים is an abstract noun, “wantonness.” G is consistent in his rendering; Isa 66:4 also has ἐμπαίγματα for תעלול. Jude 18 uses a word from Isa 3:4, in ἐπʼ ἐσχάτου χρόνου ἔσονται ἐμπαῖκται κατὰ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἐπιθυμίας πορευόμενοι τῶν ἀσεβειῶν. Tertullian saw in this verse the lawyers who put heavy demands on the people (Marc. 4.27).
5 The verb συμπίπτω means “fall together” in the sense of collapse. προσκόπτω carries both physical and figurative senses: stumbling against, and feeling or giving offense. The two words ἄτιμος and ἔντιμον are mirror images of each other. The alliteration of initial M-sounds in Hebrew is replaced by alliteration of initial I-sounds in Greek. Clement of Rome quoted 3:5 οἱ ἄτιμοι ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐντίμους when describing the jealousy of
his readers (1 Clem. 3.3). Justin (Dial. 24) used 3:5 to apostrophise the Gentiles. Although there are no direct verbal parallels, Isa 3:5-6 is reminiscent of the enmity described in Mic 7:6: διότι υἱὸς ἀτιμάζει πατέρα, θυγάτηρ ἐπαναστήσεται ἐπὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτῆς, νύμφη ἐπὶ τὴν πενθερὰν αὐτῆς, ἐχθροὶ ἀνδρὸς πάντες οἱ ἄνδρες οἱ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ.
6 The removal of leaders by Lord Sabaoth leads to desperation on the part of the populace. The verb ἐπιλαμβάνω, “lay hold of,” takes its objects ἀδελφοῦ andοἰκείου (a household member) in the genitive. Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; Q’s corrector deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, here in 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; and from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5. The criterion for one’s selection as a leader (owning clothing) is just as unexpected in the Hebrew as in the Greek. The demand to become a leader is in the imperative (aorist of γίνομαι). Where G has τὸ ἐμόν indicating who owns the food, MT has הזאת “this.” Silva translated ὑπό as “under” because σε is in the accusative, with a note: “Or supplied by.” ὑπό is not G’s usual translation of תַּחַת, which more commonly is rendered ἀντί, but ὑπό is more appropriate here because ὑπό can carry the sense of “under the control of,” as Muraoka noted when adducing the similar expressions in Deut 33:3 ὑπὸ τὰς χεῖράς σου … ὑπὸ σέ είσιν; Ps 143:2 ύποτάσσων τόν λαόν μου ύπ’ έμέ, and 1 Macc 10:38 γενέσθαι ύφ’ ένα ‘to come under one ruler.’
7 The poverty is such that even those who were begged to be leaders have no food or clothing. The leadership candidate’s objection is that he does not in fact have clothing, or bread for that matter. The phrase ἀποκριθεὶς ἐρεῖ recalls the similar use of ἀποκριθείς in the Gospel narratives. A time reference is given as τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, which is when Lord Sabaoth removes the leadership (3:1). MT has תְשִׂימֻ֖נִי in place of ἔσομαι; as Tov noted, this is a change from passive to active.
8 The perfect of ἀνίημι refers to the condition of no longer being held together or coherent, so the English released or collapsed would be appropriate glosses. For αἱ γλῶσσαι αὐτῶν μετὰ ἀνομίας Silva has “their tongues are joined with lawlessness”; Ottley translated as “their tongues (are) with transgression.” The Hebrew behind μετὰ ἀνομίας is ומעלליהם “and their deeds,” from the same root as תַּעֲלוּלִים in section 16 above. ἀνομία is a favourite lexical item of G when he is at a loss. The proposition μετά carries the sense of accompaniment. Since G interpreted ומעלליהם with the previous clause, he now had to insert τά before πρὸς κύριον ἀπειθοῦντες. The church fathers do not comment on what these might be. The phrase τὰ πρὸς κύριον appears in the scriptures only in Deuteronomy. Deut 9:24 has ἀπειθοῦντες ἦτε τὰ πρὸς κύριον. ἀπειθέω appears 13 times in Isaiah, translating
מרה 3 times, מאס twice, סרר twice, איב once, יסר once, סיג once, and סרה once. It is the most common translation of מרה in the Pentateuch, especially Deut. Possibly G read the samek in סרר יסר and סרה as a mem. Normally this verb takes its object in the dative, so the accusative limiting this verb, τὰ πρὸς κύριον, is not a direct object but a more general adverbial modifier “with respect to the things regarding Lord.” The aorist indicative occurs with a present adverb νῦν ἐταπεινώθη, translating עני as if from ענה, “humble” rather the MT’s עֵנֵי, “eyes.” The words Διότι νῦν have no counterpart in MT. G read the ו as a conjunction rather than a suffix on כָּבוֹד as in MT.
9 The aorist form of ἀνθίστημι, ἀντέστη, “set against” sounds like its Hebrew counterpart עָנְתָה, from עָנָה “answer.” ἀνθίστημι refers to opposition or resistance; Eusebius wrote that their tongues and practices were against the Lord and provoked him (1.29). The ending on Σοδόμων is plural because the lexical form Σόδομα is neuter plural. The genitive indicates “like that of Sodom.” Because ἐμφανίζω denotes making something evident, ἐνεφάνισαν is an appropriate paraphrase of לֹא כִחֵדוּ “they did not hide.” Eusebius interpreted this provocation in word and deed in light of the following section, in which the just man is bound.
9 Woe is directed against Jerusalem and Judea for their handling of the righteous. G has them plotting καθʼ ἑαυτῶν, which although Silva translated “against them,” would most naturally have been read reflexively, as Eusebius has it, “they have given evil counsel against their own soul, or rather, they suffered these things according to that which was resolved” (1.29).
10 They say, Δήσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, a masculine noun. In two cases, Justin reads δήσωμεν here, as does G. But instead of δήσωμεν the commentary of Eusebius has ἄρωμεν, as does Justin’s Dial. 136. Wisdom of Solomon 2:12 has ἐνεδρεύσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡμῖν ἐστιν καὶ ἐναντιοῦται τοῖς ἔργοις ἡμῶν, but Barnabas 6.7 (according to Lightfoot) follows G exactly. Barnabas says the prophet speaks against Israel, that Isa 3:9 foretells Jesus’ suffering. Hegesippus may have applied the phrase τὸν δίκαιον to James “the Just;” Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 2.23.13) considered the martyrdom of James fulfillment of this verse. But Justin Martyr quoted 3:9-15 as a curse on the Jews for doing “such things” against Christ (Dial. 133), “publishing throughout all the land bitter and dark and unjust things against the only blameless and righteous Light sent by God” (Dial. 17). Rufinus found the binding of the just one fulfilled by Judas’ betrayal of Jesus (A Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed 20). G changed the subject to δύσχρηστος, but retained the meaning; the MT has טוב “it is good.” G could be understood as
“he is inconvenient.” The particle τοίνυν appears in G four times, more than any other translated book of the Greek Bible (it is common in 4 Macc). The plural γενήματα translates פרי “product, fruit,” which in the Pentateuch tends to be rendered καρπός, but in G is so rendered only at 37:30. The subject of φάγονται must still be Judea, from 3:8. Justin (Dial. 17; 133; 136; 137) saw the Jewish rejecters of Jesus in 3:9-10.
Woe to lawbreakers(3:11–15)[[@Bible:Isa 3:9-11]]
11 To translate רשׁע G used another favourite that he often drew on when at a loss: ἀνόμῳ. Its twenty instances in G translate 14 different Hebrew words, but it does not appear in the Pentateuch. Origen (Comm. Matt. 13.30) saw in 3:11 a warning for judgement day. He quoted the clause “according to the works of our own hands shall it happen unto us” as a parallel to Matt 7:2.
12 That the woes are not directed to the entire population of Judea is evident from the sympathetic treatment of “my people” beginning in 3:12. G took Λαός μου as a vocative; perhaps this explains the second person pronouns that follow, where MT has the third person. The second person pronouns in the MT appear only in the second half of 3:12. It is specifically those in authority that are judged; a πράκτωρ is a court official responsible for collecting debts. There are two meanings for the Hebrew root עול behind מעולל, translating καλαμῶνται: (1) suckle or (2) act wrongly. G chose neither of these, deriving the meaning instead from עלל “glean.” G understood ונשים “and women” as נגשים, i.e., the πράκτορες who demanded (ἀπαιτοῦντες) repayment.
For the typically feminine τὴν τρίβον (the reading of S, A, and Ziegler); Q, B, and Rahlfs have τὸν τρίβον. Normally τρίβος is feminine, but LSJ provide some examples of masculine forms in Euripides and Plutarch. Cyprian applied 3:12 to church elders who permit communication with the lapsed: “They who call you happy cause you to err, and destroy the path of your feet” (Ep. 27.2 and Laps. 14). “They who call you happy” are the Christians who soothe the lapsed with flattery, which is pernicious (Test. 3.115).
13 Instead of extortion, Lord insists on justice. G highlighted the contrast with Ἀλλὰ νῦν to which there is no counterpart in MT. The verb καταστήσεται would mean “set down” if transitive, but in this context it is middle, intransitive “stand.” For example, we find καταστὰς ἔλεγε in an assembly, in Herodotus, Hist. 1.152.1, meaning “he stood and began speaking.” The preposition εἰς here indicates purpose, i. e., “for” in the sense of not “on behalf of judgement” but “for the purpose of judgement.”
14 No pronoun corresponding to αὐτός is present in MT; likely αὐτός is a repeated translation of הוה as הוא. Bar-Asher wrote on a similar Hebrew-only phenomenon (2013). The nominitive ὑμεῖς provides focus. The interrogative τί applies to two questions, the second being the verbless question ἁρπαγὴ τοῦ πτωχοῦ ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις ὑμῶν.
15 The meaning of καταισχύνετε is the same kind of disgrace as in 1 Cor 11:4. The rhetorical questions serve to identify which behaviours are unjust.
16-26 Women who now enjoy luxury can expect to have their fortunes reversed. As Ottley noted, satire is achieved simply by listing the various cosmetic devices, and the exact nature of each one is of minor importance. Therefore G can be forgiven for adding a couple of items to the Hebrew list (in 3:18), and perhaps guessing at some of the more obscure vocabulary. The differences between the Hebrew and Greek are so great that Ziegler was reluctant to call this section a translation at all (1934, 208). Michael van der Meer found literary dependence on Exodus 35:22 and Numbers 31:50, where luxury items are dedicated to the priests (2008b, 588). Arie van der Kooij noticed that the luxury items were divided into the same two categories typically used for dowries: clothing and adornments (2004, 129–30). This section was popular among the church fathers. Clement of Alexandria seems to have had 3:18-23 in mind in his critique of ornamentation in Paed. 2.13 and 3.11. Cyprian said Isaiah “chides the daughters of Sion” for “departing from God for the sake of the world’s delights” (Habit. virg. 13). In explaining why Christ addresses only men in his admonitions against lust, Chrysostom offered Isa 3:16 as “His rebuke for them in particular” (Homily 17, on Mt 5:27). He also quoted Isa 3:16, 24 in Homily 89 (on Mt 27:62, 64) and Homily 8 (on 1 Timothy 2:8–10), to rebuke women who are vain.
16 As in most of the OG, יַעַן is translated by ἀντί in the phrase Ἀνθ ὧν, the first occurrence of יַעַן in Isaiah. But after this, perhaps recognizing the awkwardness of ἀντί here, G does not render it as ἀντί again, but prefers ὅτι. νεῦμα is a sign which can be done in time to music, or as a command.
It normally corresponds to the English “nod,” but probably because of ὀφθαλμῶν, Silva uses “wink” instead. The noun πορείᾳ is related to the more familiar verb πορεύομαι and refers to a way of going. Twice G adds ἅμα, with nothing corresponding in the MT. The meaning of παίζω is to actively amuse. We might say “play around” or “have fun.” Silva has “being playful.”
17 In place of ὁ θεός MT has אדני. The noun σχῆμα is often used for the outward appearance (rather than reality), which as the object of ἀποκαλύπτω, would mean the women’s figures would be exposed. But σχῆμα could also mean the character or characteristic property of the women. I suspect the translator did not understand the Hebrew word פֹּת (“socket”) in 1 Kgdms 7:50 and guessed at something that would fit the context.
18 Especially in the plural, κόσμος refers to women’s ornamentation. The English word “cosmetic” is derived from κόσμος, but that is an inappropriate translation here because cosmetics tend to be preparations applied to the body rather than objects of decoration. Also in Isa 3:18, 26. One of the ornaments (ἐμπλόκιον) is according to van der Meer “a valuable stitch work of golden threads entwined into the hair” (2008b, 590) rather than the hair-clasp our lexicons suggest. In its entry on κοσύμβος LSJ refers only to this instance, giving the meaning “hair-net,” which seems to me far from certain. Related words κοσύμβη and κοσυμβωτός tend to indicate “fringe.” Tertullian mentioned these in The Apparel of Women 2.10. The adjective μηνίσκους denotes something moon-shaped, i.e., a crescent.
19 A κάθεμα appears around one’s neck in Ezek 16:11. In Clement of Alexandria they are necklets (Paed. 2.13).
20 The words καὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦ κόσμου have no counterpart in MT. σύνθεσιν refers to a combination, in this case of clothes, i.e., a suit or wardrobe.
The collection of jewellery is reminiscent of Exodus 35:22 and Numbers 31:50. Some of the vocabulary is rare: χλιδών is a bracelet (2 Kingdoms 1:10); ψέλιον is an armlet (Genesis 24:22); ἐμπλόκιον is a hair-clasp; περιδέξιον is a right armlet.
21 The adjective περιπόρφυρος means purple-edged, normally referring to clothing. The similar word μεσοπόρφυρα means made of another colour and purple.
22 G was at a loss as to how to render חָרִיט, so he guessed τὰ κατὰ τὴν οἰκίαν. The nature of τὰ διαφανῆ Λακωνικά (the transparent Spartan things) is not specified. Ottley referred to the διαφανῆ χιτωνία in Aristophanes Lys. 48, which does fit the context.
23 The phrases καὶ τὰ βύσσινα καὶ τὰ ὑακίνθινα καὶ τὰ κόκκινα and σὺν χρυσίῳ καὶ ὑακίνθῳ are not found in MT. Συγκαθυφαίνω appears here as a neologism, apparently meaning “interweave.” An alternate spelling of θερίστριον is attested in θέριστρα, a summer garment, used for adornment of the head in Genesis 24 and 38. Van der Meer’s research identified the θερίστρον as a “cap,” “shawl,” or “scarf” (2008b, 595), intended not to hide but to adorn. In LSJ, κατακλειστος is glossed “shut up.” The meaning of this hapax legomenon is usually sought for in the cognates κατακλίνω, κατακλινής, and κατακλιτέον, which refer to being bed-ridden due to illness. Van der Meer rejected this interpretation and suggested κατάκλιτος is an etymological guess of the meaning of הרדידים, from ירד “go down” (2008b, 596).
24 The reversal of fortunes are expressed in a series of contrasts introduced by ἀντί. A pleasant (ἡδύς) scent (ὀσμῆς) is replaced by a cloud of dust. The second person form ζώσῃ (from ζώννυμαι “belt up”) appears unexpectedly. In the Hebrew, the second person pronoun appears at the beginning of verse 25, but as a possessive suffix. The genitive τοῦ χρυσίου modifies τοῦ κόσμου. Origen quoted 3:24 in Princ. 2.3.6, to discuss the “world” (κόσμος), appealing to Wisdom 18:24. In Wisdom, κόσμος has a philosophical meaning that is foreign to most of the rest of the LXX. The noun φαλάκρωμα is cognate with the adjective
φαλακρός (bald). The phrase ἕξεις διὰ τὰ ἔργα σου has no counterpart in MT.
25 The loss will not be limited to possessions. What the women hold even more dear, their men, will also be taken. The phrase ὃν ἀγαπᾷς is not represented in MT and does not appear elsewhere in OG.
26 The noun θῆκαι generally refers to receptacles, in this case because of τοῦκόσμουjewelery boxes come most immediately to mind. But θῆκαι is also used of graves and sheaths, so a double meaning is possible here, given that the families of the women are to be killed. It is impossible for the impersonal nominative θῆκαι to “mourn,” so the subject of πενθήσουσιν is likely an unspecified group of mourners. The second person addressee changes from plural ὑμῶν to singular καταλειφθήσῃ. The epsilon at the beginning of ἐδαφισθήσῃ is not an augment but part of the lexical form; it is the future passive of ἐδαφίζω.
1 The future hardship of women continues to be in view, in language reminiscient of the shortage of leaders in 3:6. This would be the logical consequence of the death of sons and men mentioned in 3:25. Marriageable men will be so rare that that the women promise to be self-sufficient if only they can be married. MT begins chapter 4 with words not represented in G, ביום ההוא; they are probably a late gloss (Williamson 2006, 1:294). LSJ says καλεῖν ὄνομα ἐπί τινι is to give a name to something, citing Plato’s Parmenides 147d, as well as καλεῖν τινὰ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός (Luke 1:59), and the passive καλεῖσθαι ἐπί τινι in Gen 48:6, but those use the dative case, unlike the accusative κεκλήσθω ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς found here. Polybius has ἐπʼ ὀνόματος καλεῖν τινα, but that is genitive. The instances in the Greek Bible in which καλεῖν ἐπί are used with the accusative all refer to something being summoned to that thing in the accusative case. Jeremiah 25:29 may be a parallel, with ὠνομάσθη τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπʼ αὐτήν. Victorinus included “the seven women of Isaiah” in a list of biblical sevens explaining the importance of the number seven (On the Creation of the World). He also claimed the “one man” is Christ, the seven women are seven churches, the bread is the Holy Spirit, the garments are the glory of immortality, the reproach is original sin (taken away in baptism), and the name is “Christian” (Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John 1).
2 Once the powerful of Judea have been brought to this low point, the prophet promises that God will also reverse the fortunes of the lowly remnant of Israel. The δέ in 4:2 has no counterpart in Hebrew; this happens almost 40 times in Isaiah (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 130) Ottley called this a “sudden transition” (1904, 1:2:121). ἐπιλάμψει translates the root צמח, which is usually translated by a form of ἀνατέλλω, as in 42:9; 43:19; 44:4; 45:8; 58:8; 61:11. Ottley claimed G read יצח, which is translated by ἔλαμψαν in Lam 4:7, but more likely G read יהיה צמח as a periphrastic future participle: God “will be arising.” The verb ἐπιλάμπω is used in the Greek Bible only here and Wisdom 5:6. Ziegler claimed G considered this a theophany (1934, 107–8). The noun צמח (which also appears in 61:10) carries messianic connotations in Jeremiah 23:5 but G did not bring out such connotations here. For ἐν βουλῇ, G read צבי “beauty, honor” if it were the Aramaic צבו “purpose” from the root צְבָא “desire,” as Ottley noted (1904, 1:2:121) (see Dan 4:17). The neuter passive participle καταλειφθέν translates יתר in Leviticus 6 and 14. Here it translates פליטה, which normally is rendered with a form of σῴζω (but see Isa 37:31); Obadiah and Joel exhibit the highest incidence of the word פליטה . Most of the instances of καταλείπω in the OG are translations of שׁאר, עזב or יתר. The aorist passive participle of καταλείπω appears most often in Isaiah (4:2, 3; 6:12; 7:3, 22; 10:19, 20, 21; 11:11, 16; 24:14; 28:5).
3 The noun τὸ ὑπολειφθέν is a synonym for καταλειφθέν “remnant.” These are those who remain after the removal of Jerusalem’s leaders. Most of the instances of ὑπολείπω in the OG are translations of שׁאר or יתר. This is the only instance of the aorist passive participle of ὑπολείπω in G, but it also occurs in 4 Kingdoms 19:30. The angel in Luke 1:35 alludes to the phrase ἅγιοικληθήσονται with itsδιὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον κληθήσεται υἱὸς θεοῦ. There is an echo of οἱγραφέντεςεἰςζωὴνἐνἸερουσαλήμ in Luke 10:20 χαίρετε δὲ ὅτι τὰ ὀνόματα ὑμῶν ἐγγέγραπται ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς; Rev 20:12 καὶ βιβλία ἠνοίχθησαν, καὶ ἄλλο βιβλίον ἠνοίχθη, ὅ ἐστιν τῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ἐκρίθησαν οἱ νεκροὶ ἐκ τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τοῖς βιβλίοις κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν; Rev 21:27 καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος εἰ μὴ οἱ γεγραμμένοι ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου.
4 The conjunction ὅτι provides the reason for the situation just described: Lord will burn away injustice. G reverses the tense of the Hebrew qatal form in 4:4 by using ἐκπλυνεῖ, the future of ἐκπλύνω “wash out.” The word for filth,
ῥύπος, is used also in 1 Pet 3:21. The phrase τῶν υἱῶν καί has no counterpart in MT. Q, as well as uncials and editions other than S, lacks a second ἐν, prior to πνεύματι καύσεως. The Hebrew has the preposition ב in both instances. The subject of ἐκκαθαριεῖ (future of ἐκκαθαρίζω) is probably still Κύριος, with τὸ αἷμα as object. Eusebius noted the similarity of imagery to that of 1:15-16 (1.32). Irenaeus said Jesus washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion when he washed the disciples’s feet (Haer. 4.22.1). Clement of Alexandria said it is necessary to wash the soul in the cleansing Word, a spiritual bath, of which prophecy speaks, citing this verse. He explained that the “blood” is crime and the murders of the prophets, and the mode of cleansing is “by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning,” which is not physical cleansing, since it is not with water (Paed. 3.9). Origen, in arguing that the purpose of God’s fury is to cleanse souls, introduced a quotation of 4:4 with “Isaiah, who speaks thus of Israel” (Princ. 2.10.6).
G added it to resolve some of the syntactic difficulties resulting from his earlier misunderstandings, but was unsuccessful. But a reader might understand σκιάσει not as a verb but as the dative of the noun σκίασις, in which case the only verb is ἔσται, and the two nominatives are πᾶς τόπος τοῦ ὄρους Σιὼν καὶ πάντα τὰ περικύκλῳ αὐτῆς and νεφέλη. Then we could translate, “Every place of the mountain Zion and everything around it will be a cloud for shade…” and this may solve one of the problems regarding the verbs’ subjects in the next verse. Silva has “and as for every site of Mount Sion and all that surrounds it, a cloud will overshadow it,” moving “will be” into the next clause. See the discussion on ἔσται above. Ottley wrote, “As the text stands, however, πᾶς τόπος is probably a casus pendens, filling the place of another object to σκιάσει, and perhaps changed to the nom. by the influence of ἔσται preceding, aided by the general influence of Heb. syntax” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:122) (2.122). The genitives ἡμέρας and νυκτός indicate time, “by day” and “by night.” The phrase ὡς καπνοῦ καὶ ὡς φωτὸς πυρὸς καιομένου is separated from ἡμέρας by the καί, so it modifies νυκτός rather than ἡμέρας. The participle καιομένου modifies πυρός attributively, so the sense is “like (that) of smoke and like (that) of (the) light of burning fire.” B (Swete) lacks ὡς before φωτός, but adds καί before πάσῃ. For σκεπασθήσεται, MT has the noun חפה. We would expect the subject to remain the same as in the preceding verse, whether νεφέλη or πᾶς τόπος. The latter makes more sense as something to be sheltered. The synonymous σκιά and σκέπη frame Isa 4:5-6 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 166); σκιάζω recalls the pillar of cloud from e.g., Num 10:34 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 263). The author of Rev 14:1 possibly had this τοῦ ὄρους Σιών in mind, when he wrote, Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἰδοὺ τὸ ἀρνίον ἑστὸς ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος Σιών. The phrase τὸ ὄρος Σιών (in its various cases) appears elsewhere only in Isa 8:18; 10:12; Joel 3:5; Obad 17; Jer 38:12; Ps 47:12; 132:3.
6 Again the subject of ἔσται should remain the same, but in this case νεφέλη makes more sense as something that will serve as a shade. In the paragraph as a whole we find something sheltering and something being sheltered. It appears most sensible to understand that the “spirit of burning” produces a cloud of smoke that then protects Zion and its environs. The judgement of Zion becomes its salvation. Chrysostom cited 4:6 to show that the “cloud” of witnesses in Hebrews 12:1 is often offered by scripture as a consolation, since it protects “from burning heat, and from storm, and rain” (Hom. Heb. 28.3). Eusebius interpreted the cloud and fire as protection for the church in times of persecution, and illumination (1.32).
The oracle commonly called the “Song of the Vineyard,” provides a classic example of parable (with interpretation) and paranomasia in Hebrew. In the parable, the farmer provides everything his vineyard needs, and expects a good crop, yet the vineyard produces bad grapes instead, so the farmer lets the vineyard revert to an uncultivated wasteland. In the interpretation, Lord Sabaoth expects justice and righteousness, but Israel and Judah produce lawlessness and an outcry instead. Their fate is left unstated. The first of the two datives (τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ and τῷ ἀμπελῶνι) indicates to whom the song is sung, the other indicates the topic of the song. Note the difference between ἀγαπητοῦ and the earlier ἠγαπημένῳ.
1 According to BDAG, γίνομαι with the dative in the sense of belonging (as in ἐγενήθη τῷ) is attested around the time of G, in the Petrie Papyri (Mahaffy and Smyly 1891, l. II, 40b, 7) and the Egyptian ostraca (Wilcken 1899, 2:II, 1530, 2f). The Greek word κέρατι even sounds like the Hebrew קרן it translates; here the Hebrew means a hill or peak, as in Arabic, but G translated it as if it were the usual word for a horn. G translated the Hebrew שׁמן literally as πίονι, “fat,” but either he omitted בן or rendered it as ἐν τόπῳ.
2 The singer takes good care of the vineyard by enclosing it with a fence (φραγμόν), planting (φυτεύω) a special vine, building a protective tower, and high hopes of using the vat he dug (ὀρύσσω) for the wine it produces. The word φραγμόν has no counterpart in MT, which simply says “he dug it.” Similarly, περιέθηκα is not represented in MT. The verb χαρακόω means “fence in.” For σωρήχ, B (Swete) has σωρήκ. These are transliterations of שׂרק, which also appears in Jer 2:21 as a kind of vine. The same word appears as a place name in Judges 16:4, where it is similarly transliterated into Greek, perhaps prompting the similar response here, although a similar Hebrew noun is rendered in Isa 16:8 as ἄμπελος. A Hebrew noun from the same root appears in Gen 49:11 (translated as ἕλιξ), and another in Zech 1:8 (as ψαρός). One would expect not χ but κ for Hebrew ק. The noun προλήνιον is related to ληνός “wine-vat” (as the Suda lists them together), but LSJ list only this instance of the word. The agent of τοῦ ποιῆσαι is of course not the subject of ἔμεινα, but the vineyard. The Hebrew קוה conveys expectation; it is translated with μένω in this chapter, its first occurrences in Isaiah, then πείθω (only in Isaiah) and ἐλπίζω (only in Isaiah) and finally ὑπομένω (as is normal in the rest of the poetic books) in the final chapters. The root קוה only appears once in the Pentateuch, at Gen 49:18, where it is rendered περιμένω. The Greek implies that he stayed and waited, rather than
hoped. The noun σταφυλή, a bunch of grapes, appears also in Matt 7:16; Luke 6:44; Rev 14:18. The thorns appear here in the plural form ἄκανθας; compare the variants in verse 6. Justin (Dial. 110) alluded to pruning the vine, but pruning is not mentioned here specifically.
Judge between me and my vineyard(5:3-6)[[@Bible:Isa 5:1-7]]
3 Once the unexpected outcome is described, a response is rhetorically requested from the reader. For ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Ἰούδα καὶ οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ, B (Swete) has the reversed οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Ἰούδα. The singular ἄνθρωπος matches the Hebrew; the plural οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες does not. The use of ἀνὰ μέσον here is odd; normally in the OG, either ἀνὰ μέσον appears before each of the nouns, (never in Isaiah, but e.g., Mal 3:19 ἀνὰ μέσον δικαίου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον ἀνόμου) or before the first, with a καί before the second (Isa 59:2 ἀνὰ μέσον ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ).
4 The farmer asks what more he could have done. The καί is a literal translation of the Hebrew conjunction, but yields awkward Greek; ὅ is expected instead. Just as in 5:2, the agent of τοῦ ποιῆσαι is not the subject of ἔμεινα, but the vineyard.
5 No answer to the farmer’s questions is needed; he knows what to do. He will remove (ἀφαιρέω) its protection, so that it will be subject to plundering (διαρπαγήν), and it will be an object of trampling (καταπάτημα).
6 The farmer will neglect (ἀνίημι) the vineyard. This same verb is used in 1:14 (where it refers to forgiveness) and 2:9 (abandonment), 3:9 (desertion), and will be again used in 5:24 (absence of control). The prototypical meaning is that bonds are broken. Given the context of tending land, the sense here is that of part 6 of the LSJ entry, “leave untilled” (s.v. ἀνίημι). Muraoka suggested “to leave uncared for” (Muraoka 1993, 39). The neglect is specified by the cessation of two activities conveyed by the aorist passive of two verbs, τέμνω and σκάπτω. The neglect will lead to the growth of thorns, as they are wont to do in an implied land that is χέρσον, dry and barren. The Hebrew has just one negator per verb, with the normal conjunction ו where G has οὐδέ.
The syntax of καὶ ταῖς νεφέλαις ἐντελοῦμαι τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι εἰς αὐτὸν ὑετόν requires some explanation. Because ἐντέλλω takes the dative of the person addressed (ταῖς νεφέλαις), and the the desired task is in the infinitive (τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι), the clouds are being addressed, and the desired result is that the rain (ὑετόν, the accusative agent of the infinitive) not wet εἰς αὐτὸν. It would make little sense for αὐτὸν ὑετόν to together be the object of εἰς.
The interpretation of the vineyard(5:7)[[@Bible:Isa 5:1-7]]
7 Finally the interpretation of the parable is given. The vineyard symbolizes Israel and the vines the people of Judah. The definite article on ἄνθρωπος is absent even though it is expected in order to distinguish the subject from the predicate; the reason for its absence in Greek is its absence in the Hebrew. The expectation of wine corresponds to the expectation of justice and righteousness, but the actual outcome was lawlessness and an outcry. If ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι κρίσιν were on its own, ἔμεινα and ποιῆσαι would be understood to have the same agent (“I waited to do justice”) but in the context of the earlier ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι σταφυλήν (Isa 5:2) and the following third-person ἐποίησεν, it is clear that Lord expected Israel to do justice. With his choice of the words κρίσιν … ἀνομίαν, δικαιοσύνην … κραυγήν, G makes no attempt to recreate the Hebrew paranomasia audible in the words mishpat-mispach, tsedaqa-tseʿaqa.
8 The poetic parabolic style of the Song of the Vineyard comes to an end, but the theme of greed resulting in a deserted land continues. The next oracle begins with an announcement of woe. Of the 22 instances of Οὐαί in Isaiah, most are followed by a nominative/vocative; only seven by the dative. The greedy act taking place is συνάπτοντες, which means joining together. The transitive use of ἐγγίζω is unusual (derived from a literal translation of the hifil of קרב), but LSJ points to some precedents, including this same construction in Gen 48:10, when they “brought” Israel’s sons to him. Here the object of ἐγγίζω cannot be moved, so the meaning must be inferred from the parallel συνάπτοντες and context. Notice the shift to the third person in ἵνα τοῦ πλησίον ἀφέλωνταί τι. The Hebrew reads literally “until the end of a place, and you live” i.e.,
until there is no land left, and the consequence is that you are left by yourself. G adds a motive (to steal from one’s neighbour) and takes the solitude not as an unpleasant natural consequence, but as a prohibition. Here πλησίον is no longer an adjective but an indeclinable adverb, as in Eph 4:25 ἕκαστος μετὰ τοῦ πλησίον αὐτοῦ. Ottley explained the development from the Hebrew as follows: “The verb must be due to LXX. having read אפם, ‘there be none’ as אסף, perhaps אספו, ‘they take away.’ πλησίον might be עד, ‘until,’ read as רע, ‘neighbour’; but if עד was represented by the conjunction, מקום might have been paraphrased, or even read as מקרב, ‘from (one) near’: finally, בקרב, ‘in the midst,’ is omitted, cf. 19:1, 14, &c.; and the interrogative may come from reading ה, sign of the passive causative (Hophal) in that sense” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:125). The aorist subjunctive with μή has a prohibative force. μόνοι is nominative plural adjective in agreement with the plural addressees.
9 James 5:4 quotes εἰς τὰ ὦτα Κυρίου Σαβαώθ without a citation formula. The adjectives in μεγάλαι καὶ καλαί modify the implicit subject of ἔσονται. G adds this verb ἔσονται and the article οἱ before ἐνοικοῦντες, so the most natural way to take the syntax is that the inhabitants will not be in the houses, which makes little sense. The Hebrew is not that difficult here; it lacks the article and the word for “inhabitant” is in the singular: they will be large and good, without inhabitant.
10 The paucity of the harvest is symbolized by the small yield it will produce: one κεράμιον, which is a jar, sometimes used as a measure, but of unspecified volume. In any case, the land worked by ten yoke of oxen (100,000 square cubitswould be expected to produce far more (Powell 1992). The ἀρτάβη is a Persian measure of perhaps 50 litres or 29-40 litres(Powell 1992), so G intends about 200-300 litres. Here the Hebrew has a homer, which is 100-200 litres or 75,000 square cubits. μέτρα τρία translates one ephah, which is one tenth of a homer, so 10-20 litres (Powell 1992). The presence of the number indicates that G had a specific volume in mind, but it is not known to us.
11 The previous woe began in verse 8, directed against the greedy; this woe is directed against drunkards. σίκερα is the transliteration of the Hebrew word שׁכר, with added alpha. The alpha suffixed to transliterated Semitic words is typically taken as an indication of Aramaic influence, and שכרא does appear once in Imperial Aramaic in line 3 of TAD D7.9 from the first quarter of the 5th century BCE. Normally, however, the Aramaic שכר appears without the determinative
alpha. Alpha is also typically affixed to transliterations into Greek of foreign words ending in consonants, to help Greek pronunciation (BDF §141(3)) (cf. ἀλφα, βητα, δελτα, from אלף, בית, דלת,etc.). The precise form of alcoholic beverage is unclear, but its usage clearly indicates that it is intoxicating, and in Isaiah it is always in parallel with wine (Isa 5:11, 22; 24:9; 28:7; 29:9).
12 The partying is contrasted with appreciating Lord’s deeds. The present ἐμβλέπουσιν, matches the present πίνουσιν; however, the Hebrew יביטו is in the yiqtol form, which normally becomes future in Greek. This verb is recalled at the end of the chapter, Isa 5:30. The present κατανοοῦσιν is attested by Q, S corrector ca (cb2 and d), A, and B. But in this case, the Hebrew ראו is the qatal form, which normally becomes aorist in Greek.
13 The initial τοίνυν and the later διὰτό present the failure to recognize Lord and his deeds as the cause of his people’s hardship. The subject of the singular ἐγενήθη is the people, λαός, so a plural pronoun “they” is used in English. For δίψαν (the reading also of S and A), B has δίψος. The two words mean the same; LSJ suggests δίψος is Attic, and δίψα Ionic, but both forms are used in the OG. The other instances in Isaiah are 41:17; 44:3; 50:2.
14 The image of desiring to consume shifts from the people to Hades, who opens its mouth wide to swallow the violent rich. The verb πλατύνω “opened wide” is attested with ψυχή as its object (see LSJ). The name ᾅδης is the standard rendering of שׁאול. Because of the variety of beliefs about the afterlife at the time of the Greek translation, it is unclear whether ᾅδης was thought to be the home of all the dead, or only the wicked. Josephus indicates there were differences of opinion among the various Jewish sects (Ant. 18.14; J.W. 2.163; 3.375). Similarly, the New Testament attests to various views (even within a single
chapter, Luke 16). The genitive article on the infinitive τοῦ μὴ διαλιπεῖν normally indicates purpose, although it seems out of place that the purpose of opening one’s mouth should be to avoid relenting.
15 Perhaps the reason that no speculation regarding the identity of the ἄνθρωπος and ἀνήρ is evident among early Christian writers is that this man is in parallel with the violent rich of the preceding verse. The adjective μετέωρος usually carries the sense of floating, either superficial or suspended in mid-air.
16 In contrast to the humbling of the arrogant, Lord Sabaoth will be exalted. Eusebius said this prophecy was fulfilled in the time of Vespasian and Hadrian (1.35).
17 Eusebius avoided the grammatical difficulties by commenting on Symmachus’ reading καὶ νεμηθήσονταί ἀμνοὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀπαγωγὴν αὐτῶν, τὰ δὲ ἔρημα τῶν παρανόμων πάροικοι φάγονται instead. We have no such easy solution. The passive βοσκηθήσονται means graze, and διαρπάζω generally means to tear away (LSJ); with people as the object, it more specifically means to abduct (BDAG). The genitive ἀπειλημμένων may be modifying either the ἐρήμους (as those producing the deserted areas) or the ἄρνες (as a partitive genitive). The word order favours the former, but the context favours the latter. If ἀπειλημμένων modifies ἐρήμους, the subjects of these two clauses appear to be incongruous. In the previous clause, those grazing are the people taken captive, but now in this clause, the lambs grazing would be doing so on the land abandoned by the people taken captive (“may lambs feed on the places deserted by those taken away”). The context favours understanding ἀπειλημμένων as a partitive genitive, so that some of the lambs that were taken away feed on the deserted places. Alternatively, the ἄρνες may be understood as the same kind of appositive nominative as νεφέλη in 4:5, which would be translated as: “may they, as lambs, feed on the deserted places.” Eusebius said this prophecy was fulfilled to the letter, when the leaders of the Jews were led into captivity by foreigners (1.35).
18 Earlier woes began in 5:8 (the greedy) and 5:11 (drunkards); this woe is directed toward skeptics. See the note on οὐαί in Isa 5:8. Second person pronouns are used in the English translation, since the nominative forms are likely
vocatives. This is confirmed by the second person pronoun in Isa 5:22. The verb ἐπισπάω means to forcibly pull something over; it is used to describe removal of circumcision in 1 Cor 7:18. There is no counterpart in MT for ζυγοῦ. The strap ἱμάντι appears again in Isa 5:27; here it is in a genitive construction with a young cow (δάμαλις). The strange order of the words ζυγοῦ ἱμάντι δαμάλεως led Ottley to comment, “Might be taken to mean, ‘a thong of a heifer’s yoke’; but the order of the words suggests that it means ‘a cow-hide chariot-trace,’ ζυγοῦ being, so to speak, the inner, and δαμάλεως the outer genitive” (1904, 1:2:128). Eusebius again recused himself from the difficulty by commenting only on the reading of Symmachus, οὐαὶ οἱ ἕλκοντες τὰς ἀνομίας ὡς σχοινίῳ ματαιότητος καὶ ὡς βρόχῳ τῆς ἁμάξης τὴν ἁμαρτίαν (1.36). For him, the rein of a wagon is what is used to pull in lawlessness.
19 Those who pull in sins ask for evidence of God’s plans; the request must be sarcastic. Eusebius said they only wanted to hear the poetry; they did not want to actually listen to the meaning. The adverbial neuter Τὸ τάχος means “quickly.” For ἴδωμεν (from εἶδον) B (Swete) has εἰδῶμεν (from οἶδα), which by itacism might be spelled the same way. εἰδῶμεν produces a more exact parallel with γνῶμεν. Justin Martyr (in both Dial. 17 and 133) only included one of these verbs; his text reads: Τὸ τάχος αὐτοῦ ἐγγισάτω, καὶ ἐλθέτω ἡ βουλὴ τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰσραὴλ, ἵνα γνῶμεν. Chrysostom appears to have understood the meaning as “see.” The noun βουλή can refer to the capacity to make wise decisions, the activity of deciding, the information used in making a decision, the resulting decision, or an official decision-making group. βουλὴ is a decided plan, often used for the divine will. The patterns in use of βουλή in the LXX differ somewhat from that of earlier Greek literature and inscriptions, notably in two ways: (1) the increased use of βουλή for advice; and (2) the frequent attestation for the capacity to make sound decisions. In the historical books, βουλή usually means advice. In the prophets, it usually refers to plans or schemes. In the wisdom literature, βουλή is commonly something the wise have or provide. Often βουλή signifies the result of deliberation, the object of one’s will, or what one tries to cause, especially in the deuterocanonical literature (11 times). Such plans are the common meaning in Isaiah (17 times) and the other prophets (6 times), but only rarely in the Psalms and wisdom literature (8 times) (Penner 2019).
20 The woes of 20-23 continue the trend toward brevity. This section contains three of them, condemning those who call evil good, those who think themselves wise,
and those who pervert justice. The double accusatives of λέγοντες are explained in section 4 of the entry in BDAG (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.2). Falsely calling something its opposite is condemned.
Woe to perverters of justice (5:21-23)[[@Bible:Isa 5:20-23]]
21 The expression συνετοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς “wise to yourselves,” is quoted as συνετοὶ ἑαυτοῖς (without ἐν) by Barn. 4.11. ἐπιστήμων is an adjective carrying connotations of expertise. Falsely claiming cleverness is condemned.
22 In Isaiah, ἰσχύω appears most often as a participle, especially in the early chapters, translating a great variety of (twelve) Hebrew words, not all of which can be related to the meaning of strength or power. This observation leads to the supposition that ἰσχύοντες is a favourite word of G, used when he is uncertain what the Hebrew means. The participle functions as an a stative adjective “strong,” rather than active participle “able.”
23 The noun δώρων often means “bribe.” The verb αἴρω can often have the meaning “kill,” but here there is an impersonal object. Giving false rulings is condemned.
24 The section beginning in 5:24 is linked to what precedes by the phrase διὰτοῦτο, which presents Lord’s wrath that follows as the consequence of the dishonesty that preceded. In this case, the false behaviours of the influential will result in the provocation of the Holy One of Israel.The expression ὃν τρόπον “in the way in which,” common in the OG to translate כ, is attested in Xenophon, Plato, Josephus, etc. In the OG, it appears in no book more than Isaiah (25 times, 20 of which are in proto-Isaiah), but Joshua, Ezekiel, and Deuteronomy are also fond of it. The future καυθήσεται is used here for timeless action, even though MT has the qatal form. The sense of ἀνίημι in the phrase φλογὸςἀνειμένης is unrestrained, as we might say in English, “with abandon.” LEH has a separate definition for this instance: “violent flame.” (Johan Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie 2008, s.v. ἀνίημι) χνοῦς and κονιορτός may both be translated dust, but χνοῦς tends to be organic (chaff), and κονιορτός road dust. Usually the object of θέλω is an infinitive verb. LSJ say that it is “not used c. acc. only, exc. when an inf. is easily supplied” (LSJ s.v. θέλω); here the object is a noun. The verb παροξύνω “arouse” is the usual translation of נאץ “disdain.”
25 Instead of ἐθυμώθη ὀργῇ as in Q and the other uncials and editions, Sinaiticus has ὀργίσθη θυμῷ. Both verbs appear in the OG and G in comparable numbers, translating חרה, and both nouns in comparable numbers, translating אף, but Isaiah prefers the noun θυμός and the verb ὀργίζω. For ἐπί (the reading also of S and B), A has εἰς. ἐπί is a better rendering of על in hostile sense, as in 1:1. Q, A, and B have the indicative παρωξύνθη instead of the aorist passive subjunctive παροξύνθῃ attested in S. The same word appears at the end of 5:24. As indicative, the sense is, “And the mountains were provoked, and their carcasses became like filth in the middle of the path,” which still is puzzling, but less awkward syntactically. Silva has “the mountains were provoked, and their carcasses became like dung in the middle of the road” (Silva 2007). Ottley has “and the mountains were provoked (to anger), and their carcases became as dung in the midst of the way” (Ottley 1904). The adjective θνησιμαῖος “dead” is first attested in the LXX, in Leviticus 5:2; 7:14; 17:15. The noun κοπρία refers to a manure-pile (compare κόπρος “manure” in Ex 29:14). Regarding B’s addition of αὐτοῦ after θυμός “passion,” see the note at beginning of this verse. The possessive pronoun “his” is present in Hebrew behind ὁ θυμός … ἡ χεὶρ, but is absent in G.
26 The relation between the two sections is specified by the particle τοιγαροῦν, which is another compound particle, very rare in translation Greek (appearing twice in Job and twice in Proverbs). Here (as in Prov 1:31 and Job 24:22) it translates the simple Hebrew conjunction ו. It indicates that what follows is the consequence of what precedes: because Lord Sabaoth’s hand is still raised, he will raise an army from the nations. Ron Troxel explained that the differences between the Hebrew and Greek in Isa 5:26-30 are not all the product of a theological agenda. In particular, singular verbs and pronouns were rendered as collectives, except in 5:29b-30, where singulars are used for God (Troxel 1993).
The first thing Lord Sabaoth raises is a sign (σύσσημον). Its location is indicated by the adverb μακράν, which was historically a feminine accusative adjective modifying an implicit ὁδόν. The adverb κούφως is congnate with the adjective κοῦφος, meaning light, nimble, quick, or easy, a good translation for קל.
27 This army does not suffer from normal human limitations; they will not hunger (future of πεινάω), or get tired due to exhaustion (future of κοπιάω),
or become drowsy (future of νυστάζω). Wheras ῥήγνυμι refers to a violent breaking, burst, παράγω means to pass by. Breaking certainly fits the context better than passing by, since the preceding clauses describe the endurance of the summoned army. The translation “would” reflects the single subjunctive after a series of futures translated “will,” because of the emphatic negative construction οὐ μή + subjunctive. The same word ἱμάντες is used earlier in this chapter at 5:18, to refer to the straps of the heifer.
28 This army is ready for battle. Their bows described using the perfect participle of ἐντείνω, “stretched.” Although it seems odd for horses hooves to be “reckoned” (ἐλογίσθησαν), that Greek rendering is simply a literal translation of נחשׁבו “reckoned.” In place of τροχοὶ τῶν ἁρμάτων αὐτῶν, MT has only וגלגליו “and their wheels,” with nothing but context to prompt the addition of τῶν ἁρμάτων. These wheels are compared to a καταιγίς “squall,” which translates סוּפָה “storm-wind.”
29 The fierceness of the army is conveyed by wild animal similes. The verb ὁρμάω connotes impulsive rushing. The reading of Vaticanus, ὀργιῶσιν, could be the present of ὀργιάω “celebrate” or the future of ὀργίζω “make angry.” The subject then changes from plural to singular. The subject of the singular verb ἐπιλήμψεται is probably is the same as that of the singular verbs in Isa 5:26. Rahlfs and Ziegler disagree about the reading βοήσει. Rahlfs follows B and S, but Ziegler follows Q and A’s βοήσεται (also in 5:30). The future is attested in both middle and active forms, but the active is considered to be a later form, becoming popular beginning in the 3rd C. BCE (LSJ s.v. βοάω).
30 The roaring extends the wild animal similes from verse 29, and the effect on the prey is to look around for an escape. The same verb as ἐμβλέψονται (5:30) appeared earlier in the chapter, where the drunkards were not considering the works of God (Isa 5:12). It is not always clear in G whether γῆ refers to the local “land” or the “earth” in contrast to the sky, but here it is the earth. However, there is no escape for them there; ἀπορία refers to a undesirable condition from which no escape seems possible.
1 This passage is one of the most famous in Isaiah. It recounts Isaiah’s call, providing hints as to the prophet’s identity and mission. It includes a rare description of supernatural beings, of ritual objects and practice. It notably includes the paradoxical commission regarding his audience perceiving and not perceiving. The verses most commonly commented on by the early fathers were those quoted already in the New Testament. These are 6:3 (the trisagion, quoted in Rev 4:8) and 6:9-10 (quoted in Matt 13:14-15; Mark 4:12; John 12:40). Often this latter passage is cited together with the “myriads” of Daniel 7:10. The narrative is introduced by a statement establishing the time at which the events happened. Καὶ ἐγένετο lacks a Hebrew counterpart. It appears seven times in Isaiah, but only here does it not translate ויהי. The genitive τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ indicates the time during which the encounter took place. Methodius Simeon and Anna 1 interpreted “Uzziah” of 6:1 as representative of the apostates, the ungrateful synagogue. The location and the identity of the speaker are not specified. The reader is left to infer that because the preceding “vision” was of Isaiah son of Amos, the same Isaiah is the first-person narrator here. The location is also left to be inferred on the basis of the physical objects mentioned: a throne, and a building. Although τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ could conceivably modify ὁ οἶκος (“the house of his glory was full”), the adjective πλήρης expects a genitive complement, so “the house was full of his glory,” much like Isa 5:3, πλήρης πᾶσα ἡ γῆ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ. Theodoret expressed some concern about how Isaiah could have “seen” God, since God is invisible and unlimited (Dialogues 1 and 2). Irenaeus (Haer. 4.20.8) said what Isaiah saw must have been Jesus, who had a visible form. The “glory” that Isaiah saw was also interpreted as Jesus by Irenaeus (Haer. 4.33.11). Likewise, Methodius read this vision as a prophecy of the incarnation, Jesus at his birth. The throne is the virgin, and the whole earth is full of his “glory,” Jesus. This interpretation likely derives from John 12:41. Methodius also saw Jesus’ mother in “the tongs of that cleansing coal.”
2 The presence of serapheim removes any doubt that this is an extraordinary sight; one does not normally see such creatures. The pluperfect εἱστήκεισαν is used for the intransitive simple past (BDAG s.v. ἵστημι C.). G has τῷ ἑνί twice, where the Hebrew idiom has לאחד only the second time. Μέν sets up the first element of what normally is a pair, but here is a triplet of phrases, all beginning καὶ ταῖς δυσίν. Imperfects are extremely rare in G. Besides the forms of εἰμί, there are only four imperfects in G, three of which are in this paragraph (the other is ἔφερον in 30:6). By contrast, Ezekiel has dozens of imperfects. The Hebrew form behind κατεκάλυπτον is yiqtol. The significance of G’s
use of imperfect is twofold: (1) G thought the yiqtol forms here conveyed imperfective aspect; (2) G did not think the yiqtol forms regularly conveyed imperfective aspect.
3 The serapheim’s constant activities (expressed with imperfect verbs) are covering (hands and feet), flying, shouting, and saying the trisagion. For ἐκέκραγον (with S and A), B (Swete) has the singular ἐκέκραγεν. A reader might mistake ἐκέκραγον for a second aorist. It is not pluperfect because the ending is not -σαν. The aorist active principal part is normally ἐκέκραξα, with the imperative κέκραξον. The perfect is κέκραγα, with infinitive κεκραγέναι The Hebrew form here is qatal. Muraoka called it an imperfect (parallel to the other tenses in this context), but possible aorist, citing Thackeray, who said, “the aor. takes 3 (or 4) forms, the third only being classical: (i) usually ἐκέκραξα, (ii) ἔκραξα rarely and in books using pres. κράζω, but always ἀνέκραξα, (iii) ἀνέκραγον, (iv) possibly redupl. 2nd aor. ἐκέκραγον, unless this should be regarded as impf. from κεκράγω, §§21,1; 19,1” (Thackeray 1978, sec. 24). Ottley wrote, “The LXX. use many reduplicated forms of this verb, Numb. xi. 2, Job vi. 5, and frequently, esp. in the Psalms, as xxxiv. 6, 17, lv. 16, lvii. 3. Lightfoot, on Clem. Rom. Ep. Cor. i. 34, where this passage is quoted, treats ἐκέγραγον as the imperf. of a new verb κεγράγω, formed from κέκραγα” (Ottley 1904, 1:2.133). See also the note on κεκραγέτωσαν at 14:31. The phrasing of ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον mimics the Hebrew expression זה אל זה, but is not entirely a literal rendering, which would be οὗτος πρὸς τοῦτον. The forms here imply the seraphs are masculine. In 6:6 they are neuter. Rev 4:8 alludes to Isa 6:3: καὶ τὰ τέσσερα ζῷα, ἓν καθʼ ἓν αὐτῶν ἔχων ἀνὰ πτέρυγας ἕξ, κυκλόθεν καὶ ἔσωθεν γέμουσιν ὀφθαλμῶν, καὶ ἀνάπαυσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς λέγοντες: ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος. 1 Clement 34:6 quotes 6:3, omitting one phrase, ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον καὶ ἔλεγον, and changing the word γῆ to κτίσις, as follows: καὶ ἐκέκραγον· Ἅγιος, ἄγιος, ἄγιος Κύριος Σαβαώθ, πλήρης πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ. The seraphim were taken as evidence of the Trinity, the two seraphim being the Son and Spirit (Origen, Princ. 1.3.4). The early interpreters commonly cited Habakkuk 3:2 in conjunction with Isa 6:3.
4 In the beginning of the narrative, the house was full of God’s glory; in 6:4 it is full of sound and smoke. ἐπήρθη is the aorist passive of ἐπαίρω. ὑπέρθυρον, literally “over door” is the lintel. See the note on 6:3 regarding the form of ἐκέκραγον.
I have impure lips(6:5)[[@Bible:Isa 6:6-7]]
5 The narrator expresses his dismay at this experience because purity has encountered impurity. Τάλας translates אוי only here. In fact, only here is τάλας
a translation of Hebrew; the other three instances in the Greek Bible are in Wisdom and 4 Maccabees. Κατανύω means bring to an end; κατανύσσω means pierce, usually not physically. The Hebrew דמה could mean “silenced” or “destroyed.” The participles ὢν and ἔχων could have a concessive sense “although I am … and have …” but Silva leaves the meaning of the participle ambiguous, translating “for being a man and having unclean lips, I live among a people having unclean lips” (Silva 2007). Similarly, Ottley has “for being (but) a man, and with impure lips, I dwell in the midst of a people with impure lips” (Ottley 1904). There is an article on the word for king, but none on the word for Lord, indicating again that Κύριος is more of a name than a title (see the Introduction).
6 The response to the volatile situation when pure encounters impure is the gracious purification of the impure. The identity of the agent sending the saraph is not indicated. ἀπεστάλη is the aorist passive of ἀποστέλλω. The neuter ἕν is in contrast to Isa 6:3, where the seraphs were masculine. The two words λαβίδι ἔλαβεν are both derived from the root *λαβ, just as the Hebrew words behind them both derive from לקח.
7 The impurity that required removal consists of transgressions. In the first instance of ἥψατο, the subject appears to be the seraph (which is the subject of the preceding and following verbs). In the second instance, the subject is clearly the coal. Following the Hebrew closely, the coal is said to touch not the lips but the mouth. ἀφελεῖ is the future of ἀφαιρέω, and περικαθαριεῖ is the future of περικαθαρίζω.
8 After Isaiah is purified, the Lord seeks an ambassador, and the narrator volunteers. The translation “here I am” is idiomatic English for the response to the question “whom shall I send.” G has no word corresponding to “here,” and it could be translated “I am the one” just as well.
Isaiah’s commission(6:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 6:8-10]]
9 The Lord then commissions the narrator with a message for “this” people. The context around εἶπον demands that it be read as an imperative. The
accentuation agrees with Ziegler, but Swete and Rahlfs have εἰπὸν. On the question of the accent, LSJ refers to Herodianus Grammaticus 1.460. συνῆτε is from συνίημι. A noun in the dative and a future verb Ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε translate one Hebrew infinitive absolute construction, but another is rendered by a participle (βλέποντες) which is the most common way of translating the infinitive absolute. The relationship of the various clauses in this sentence has been much discussed (New 1991; Evans 1982b; 1982a; 1983; Karrer 2000; Menken 1988). The first two are not very controversial (Καὶεἶπεν and Πορεύθητικαὶεἶποντῷλαῷτούτῳ), aside from the discussion on Isa 6:9 above. But the relationship between the next three parts of the sentence needs clarification. First are two future indicatives with matching doubly negated subjunctives, then introduced by γάρ are three aorist indicatives, and finally introduced by μήποτε are foursubjunctives and a future. The function of γάρ is to provide the reason for something, the cause for the effect that has just been stated. In this case, the cause is the insensitivity of the people’s faculties of perception and the effect is the lack of understanding. It is unspecified whether the explanatory clause introduced by γάρis addressed to the people, to prophet, or to the reader, but the parallel between 6:9’s τῷλαῷτούτῳ and 6:10’s τοῦλαοῦτούτου indicates that the same participants are intended in both: God is addressing the prophet.
10 The verb ἐπαχύνθη (from παχύνω) is a literal rendering of השׁמן “fatten,” but MT has an active rather than passive form. Καμμύω and καταμύω mean close the eyes. Συνῶσιν is the subjunctive of συνίημι, the same verb as in 6:9. Isa 6:9-10 is quoted multiple times in the New Testament. John 12:40 has τετύφλωκεν αὐτῶν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ ἐπώρωσεν αὐτῶν τὴν καρδίαν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ νοήσωσιν τῇ καρδίᾳ καὶ στραφῶσιν καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Mark 4:12 has ἵνα βλέποντες βλέπωσιν καὶ μὴ ἴδωσιν, καὶ ἀκούοντες ἀκούωσιν καὶ μὴ συνιῶσιν, μήποτε ἐπιστρέψωσιν καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς. Matt 13:14-15 has ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε καὶ οὐ μὴ συνῆτε, καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε καὶ οὐ μὴ ἴδητε. ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν βαρέως ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν ἐκάμμυσαν, μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς
καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσιν καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν καὶ ἐπιστρέψωσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Acts 28:26-27 has πορεύθητι πρὸς τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον καὶ εἰπόν: ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε καὶ οὐ μὴ συνῆτε, καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε καὶ οὐ μὴ ἴδητε: ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν βαρέως ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν ἐκάμμυσαν: μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσιν καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν καὶ ἐπιστρέψωσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Note that in Matthew the only difference is the lack of αὐτῶν in ὠσὶν βαρέως, and Matthew agrees with the other NT citations in this regard. Typically, readers understood this passage as a prediction of rejection (Acts 28:26–27; Justin, Dial. 12; Sib. Or. 1.360; Cyprian, Test. 1.3) or God’s intentional obfuscation (Matt 13:14-15; Irenaeus, Haer. 4.29.1; Tertullian, Jejun. 6). Eusebius is our primary witness to that understanding. He said the Jews that saw Jesus were not responsive, but disbelieved. καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐκάμμυσαν, εἰπών· μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς (Ziegler 1975, para. 1.42) They shut their eyes so that they would not see. Anti-Jewish interpretations also arise from 6:9 in Tertullian, On Modesty 8; Origen, Against Celsus 2.8; Tertullian, Test. 1.3. The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles (3.6) interpret 6:9-10 as referring to women, who should not be teachers because they do not understand. Justin Martyr (Dial. 12) attributed 6:9-10 to Jeremiah, and so did Chrysostom (Homily 14, on Romans 8:27). Tertullian appealed to 6:9 to promote fasting as a way for one’s heart to avoid “fat” (Jejun. 6).
The most common function of μήποτε is to convey apprehension, introducing the undesirable consequence. In this sense it is normally followed by an aorist subjunctive, as we have here. The reason Isaiah should speak is because Lord wants to prevent the people from seeing and hearing and turning and being healed. A much less frequent use of μήποτε is to conjecture something, as in Job 1:5 Μήποτε οἱ υἱοί μου ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ αὐτῶν κακὰ ἐνενόησαν “perhaps my children have thought evil in their minds.” Muraoka also points to Gen 43:12 and Judges 3:24 with this sense (2009, s.v. μήποτε 5.), but in this use, it is followed by an indicative clause. The four subjunctives then should be understood as undesirable consequences, but it is unclear whether the future ἰάσομαι is directly parallel to them. If ἰάσομαι is also governed by μήποτε, the healing is a possibility. But if ἰάσομαι is an independent clause, then Lord will heal them unconditionally. G likely used καί + future simply because that is the standard translation of a waw-prefixed qatal form like ורפא. However, the purpose of this commentary is to present not the intention of the translator but the understanding of a reader of Q. As Ottley noted, G implied the responsibility for the insensitivity falls on the people themselves.
11 The prophet asks to know the extent of this fate, and the response is drastic: until there are no ἄνθρωποι in the land.
11 The preposition παρά with the infinitive is not uncommon in Greek, to give the reason for something “because” or “for” (see Josephus Ant. 7.195; J.W. 2.182; 1 Clem. 39.5). The most obvious interpretation of the ἄνθρωποι is that the land would be depopulated, but van der Kooij interpreted the “men” to be removed from the land as the foreign occupiers (van der Kooij 2012). καταλειφθήσεται (future of καταλείπω) translates a yiqtol form, apparently reading תשׁאר for תשׁאה, the verb behind ἐρημωθῶσιν in this verse. That earlier subjunctive translated a qatal שׁאו. Because ἔρημος does not have an article, it is not functioning as an attribute (i.e., “a deserted land will be left behind”). Irenaeus considered the time for the fulfilment of 6:11 to be the future. He argued against allegorizing: “If, however, any shall endeavour to allegorize [prophecies] of this kind, they shall not be found consistent with themselves in all points” (Haer. 5.34.2). He continued, “For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist.”
12 Because God is referred to in the third person, the clause beginning with μετὰ ταῦτα is evidently no longer spoken by Lord but must be the words of the narrator or editor. The words μετὰ ταῦτα are not represented in MT. The citations in LSJ’s entry on μακρύνω are almost all from the Greek Bible, but the sense is clear from the etymology and GELS that distance between two things is increased. The same verb καταλειφθέντες appeared in the previous verse, but here it translates עזב.
13 Emerton has a thorough summary of ancient interpretations of Isa 6:13, including the Greek (1982b, 212–13). The accent of ἐστιν follows B (Swete; Ziegler has ἐστι); Rahlfs has ἔστιν. According to Carson (1985, 50), the accent should only be on the penult when it stands at the beginning of a sentence or clause; when signifying existence or possibility; when it is preceded by οὐκ, μή, ὡς, εἰ, καί, ἀλλά (or ἀλλ’), τοῦτο (when elided as τοῦτ’); when it is strongly emphatic. The Hebrew clause has no verb, so that is probably why the Greek present tense was used, since the present tense is the most versatile tense of εἰμί. In this context, however, the present tense ἐστιν is surprising. Van der Kooij claimed it is in the present tense because the “tenth” is to be present constantly, in contrast to the the population, which will grow (according to Isa 6:12b). In this interpretation, the “tenth” is not ten percent of the population, but the tithe. ἐπιδέκατον is a financial term for 10%. Van der Kooij referred to Jubilees
32:2, where Jacob tithes his sons, to argue that this “tithe” is Levi (van der Kooij 2012, 73). Forms of היה ל meaning “become” are often translated literally as forms of εἰμί εἰς. Emerton suggested προνομήrefers not to plunder (contra Ottley 1904), but animal fodder. For ἀπὸ, with S and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), B (Swete) has ἐκ; Emerton suggested the Hebrew had מן here. The word θήκη is used for containers, especially graves and sheaths (for swords). Muraoka suggested, “the ground in which the roots of a tree lie (?) or a husk of acorns” (2009, s.v. θήκη). In Isa 3:26 the ornament cases, αἱ θῆκαι τοῦ κόσμου of the women were mentioned. Emerton translated, “and like an acorn when it falls from its cup.” Arie van der Kooij saw in Isa 6:13 a strong interest in the priesthood, in that that an acorn falling from its husk refers to the loss of a position of power by the descendents of the tithed son Levi, and the imagery of plunder indicates that this loss took place violently (van der Kooij 2012).
1 The seventh chapter of Greek Isaiah is the one that generates the most discussion, even more than chapter 53. Almost all the attention is directed to Isa 7:14 and its application to the birth of Jesus. Eusebius said this extended prophecy presents “the divinity of the only begotten son” (1.43). This Christological use makes it easy to miss the intention of the prophecy, which is to encourage Ahaz to put his trust in Lord. There is no υἱοῦ to describe τοῦ Ἰωαθὰμ, as there is with Ὀζείου. Although both Rhaasson and Phakee went up, ἀνέβη is singular; ἠδυνήθησαν is plural.
Aram joined with Ephraim(7:2)[[@Bible:Isa 7:1-2]]
2 The agent of the passive ἀνηγγέλη (who did the reporting) is not specified. The preposition εἰς is unusual with ἀναγγέλλω. Twice (also in 7:13) Achaz is addressed as οἶκος Δαυείδ; Eusebius said those under Achaz were called the “house of David”: οὕτω δὲ ἐκαλοῦντο οἱ ἀπὸ γένους ∆αυὶδ καὶ πάντες οἱ ἐκ διαδοχῆς αὐτοῦ ἄρχοντες καὶ ἀρχόμενοι (1.43). For λέγοντες with A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), S and B (Swete) have λέγων. The Hebrew rule is that direct speech should be introduced by a form of אמר. Etymologically συμφωνέω implies harmony, but the verb is used mainly metaphorically to indicate agreement. Despite the two subjects, both of which are ψυχὴ, ἐξέστη is singular; Eusebius retained the singular “their soul was confounded” (1.43). The identity of αὐτοῦ is not specified; the most recent antecedent would be οἶκος Δαυεὶδ, and that is how Eusebius took it, but it is also grammatically possible that if the quotation does not end after Ephraim but extends to the end of the verse, αὐτοῦ could refer to Aram or Ephraim. See the comment on ὃν τρόπον in 5:24.
3 The first part of the Hebrew name שׁאר ישׁוב is translated (καταλειφθείς); the second is transliterated (Ἰασούβ). If the article in the phrase ὁκαταλειφθεὶςἸασούβ belongs with the proper name, then the translation would be “your remaining son Iasoub,” but it is simpler to take it as Silva did, so that article makes the participle substantive. It is not clear why this son should be designated as remaining; in contrast to whom?
4 The form φύλαξαι looks the same as an infinitive but in this context must be an aorist middle imperative. When followed by a infinitive verb (especially a genitive as in Jos 23:11), it means to be careful to do that verb. ξύλων “timbers” (also in Isa 7:2) and δαλῶν “fire-brands” are both nouns; the main noun is indicated by the δύο, so the other genitive δαλῶν is specifying what kind of timbers. “Once” is used in the translation rather than “when” for ὅταν because γένηται is aorist rather than present. The healing is not contemporaneous with but subsequent to the anger. ὀργή and θυμός appear in 482 verses of the OG in total; 45 of these are in Isaiah. That the two are synonymous in Isaiah is evident from the parallelism of Isa 34:2. In 12 verses in Isaiah, the two both appear. They are joined by a conjunction in 10:5, 25; 13:9; 30:30; 34:2; they are in a genitive relationship in 7:4; 30:27; 42:25 as ὀργὴ (τοῦ) θυμοῦ; and in 9:18; 13:13 as θυμὸν ὀργῆς. The Hebrew words behind θυμός are usually אַף (14 times), and חֵמָה (6 times). Behind ὀργή are usually זַ֫עַם (4 times) and אַף (2 times). When G saw either אַף or חֵמָה or עֶבְרָה his reflex was usually θυμός; only זַ֫עַם prompted him to think of ὀργή instead.
Aram plotted evil(7:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
5 The nominative ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Ἀρὰμ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Ῥομελίου does not have a verb for which it can act as a subject. The sentence lacks a main verb, since ἐβουλεύσαντο is in the ὅτι clause.
6 Swete spelled συλλαλήσαντες, which Q has in agreement with S, A, Bb (Rahlfs, Ziegler), as συνλαλήσαντες. The participle could indicate the sequence or the means by which the action of ἀποστρέψωμεν happens. Instead of the subjunctive ἀποστρέψωμεν in agreement with A (Ziegler), S and B (Swete, Rahlfs) have the future ἀποστρέψομεν. Note this is one of the few places where Rahlfs and Ziegler differ. The future tense would match the preceding Ἀναβησόμεθα and the following βασιλεύσομεν better. The basic function of the accusative is to limit or modify verbs, so τὸν υἱὸν Ταβεήλ expresses how they will rule.
7 The future ἔσται is a literal translation of תהיה, although γενήσεται would be better Greek.
8 The prepositional phrase ἀπὸ λαοῦ is a literal translation of מעם, which means “without a people.” ἐκλείπω denotes diminishing to the point of nonexistence, for which no one English word suffices.
9 Menzies argued that the reading of Isa 7:9b represented by MT, Vg, Symmachus, Theodotion, and Tg. Jon. “if you will not believe, then you will not be established” was corrupted by a scribe’s minor mechanical error compounded by a second scribe’s brilliant but mistaken conjectural emendation, to produce the reading of the LXX, Peshitta, and VL “If you will not believe, then you will not understand” (Menzies 1998). Menzies commented as follows: “It is likely that if 1QIsa reflects a corrupted text, it was corrupted from a form of the verb אמן rather than a form of the verb בין since תאמינו differs from the MT’s תאמנו by only a single consonant. This corruption should probably be attributed to an accidental insertion of a stray yod, perhaps by a fatigued copyist, and perhaps in unconscious imitation of the hiphil form of the word which appears earlier in the verse. At this point the meaning of the text became obscured. This first error was compounded when a later copyist, who recognized that there was a problem with the text of his Vorlage (1QIsa or a relative), attempted to correct the problem by emendation. This copyist substituted תבינו for (the second) תאמינו” (Menzies 1998, 126). Pancratius Beentjes argued that the Chronicler downplayed the prophet Isaiah in 2 Chronicles 29-32 in comparison to 2 Kings 18-20. Specifically, 2 Chr 20:20 transforms the prophetic warning of Isa 7:9b into a “positive summons” by King Jehosaphat that epitomizes the Chronicler’s message (Beentjes 2010).
10 Καὶ προσέθετο is a standard translation of ויוסף.
11 There is no word in MT prompting the εἰς before βάθος, but the Hebrew ל of the הגבה למעלה lies behind the εἰς before ὕψος. The sign beneath the earth and to the height above was interpreted by Irenaeus to be Christ seeking the perished sheep and ascending to his Father (Haer. 3.19.3). Irenaeus devoted an entire chapter to this prophecy (Haer. 3.21). Eusebius claimed the depths are the same as Hades (1.44).
12 The verbs αἰτήσω and πειράσω could be either futures or subjunctives.
Lord will provide the sign(7:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
13 Here the addressee is called οἶκος Δαυείδ, who might appear to be Achaz himself since no others are mentioned in attendance besides Achaz, Isaiah, and Iasoub, but the verb Ἀκούσατε and pronoun ὑμῖν are plural. Eusebius identified this house of David as the descendents of David, in agreement with his interpretation of the phrase in Isa 7:3. The question introduced by μή expects a negative answer. “It isn’t a small thing, is it?”
The maiden will bear Emmanouel(7:14-16)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
14 Because ἕξει is a durative verb, it appears to refer to pregnancy, whereas λήμψεται refers to conception. Matt 1:23 has ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον μεθʼ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός. The only difference is the third person plural καλέσουσιν for the second person plural καλέσετε. A, B (Swete, Rahlfs, Ziegler) have καλέσεις, and so do D, Origen, and Eusebius, but S reads καλέσει. In Q, Achaz and those with him will name the child; in A and B, it will be Achaz alone; in S, the maiden will name the him. When quoted by Luke, the form of the verb is second person singular, as in A and B, but the subject is the maiden, as in S. Luke 1:31 has καὶ ἰδοὺ συλλήμψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ καὶ τέξῃ υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. Dozens of articles have addressed Greek Isaiah 7:14 specifically (C. H. Gordon 1953; das Neves 1972; Dubarle 1978; Cazelles 1986; Kamesar 1990; Rösel 1991; Heath 1994; Troxel 2003; J. Lust 2004; de Sousa 2008), and Lincoln provides the most recent review of the issues (Lincoln 2012). Much of the discussion over Isa 7:14 has to do with whether certain translations are justifiable. Is παρθένος a reasonable translation of העלמה? Yes, Gen 24:43 provides a precedent. Is “virgin” a reasonable translation of παρθένος? Yes, Rev 14:4 associates παρθένος with sexual inexperience. But although these translations are reasonable, there is reason to think that sexual inexperience is not the prototypical characteristic of a παρθένος, even in G’s mind. Lincoln adduced many examples of παρθένος with the more general meaning of a woman who has not yet borne a child: Pausanias 8.20.4; Diodorus Siculus 20.84.3; Lycophron, Alexandra 1141, 1175; Sophocles, Oedipus Rex 1462, and most clearly Sophocles, Women of Trachis 1216-29, “where the dying Heracles implores his son to marry a παρθένος who has already been his own lover” (Lincoln 2012, 215). Similarly the LXX has non-virginal uses of the word in Gen. 34:3 and Joel 1:8, and even in Isa 62:5 we encounter the phraseσυνοικῶννεανίσκοςπαρθένῳ, wherethe cohabitation (notably in the present tense) implies that not sexual inexperience but age appears to be what G had in mind, since παρθένος is the female counterpart of νεανίσκος. Michaël N. van der Meer noted Rösel’s argument that עלמה rendered as παρθένος echoes the birth of Aion as reported
by Hippolytus. Pursuing this possibility that the Greek translator was influenced by Hellenistic mystery cults, van der Meer detected parallels between Greek Isaiah 7:14-17 and Greek Egyptian prophecies close in time and space to where and when Isaiah was translated into Greek. Specifically, certain phrases and images are shared between Greek Isaiah and The Dream of Nectanebo, The Oracle of the Lamb of Bokchoris and the Oracle of the Potter, and The Oracles of Ḥor. In common with the Dream of Nectanebo, Isa 6 stresses verticality (high; lintels raised). According to one possible reading, the Lamb oracle mentions a city called “a bundle of cucumbers and gourds,” reminiscent of the city razed like a cucumber field in Isa 1:8. The Potter oracle shares a topic and the word ἀνεμόφθορον with Isa 19:17, a general theme of self-destruction with Isa 19:2, the word ἀγάλματα with Isa 19:3, and most importantly, a common enemy: the Syrian king. Assuming Isa 14:4-21 and Isa 22:1-14 allude to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, van der Meer saw another parallel between the Egyptian oracle and Greek Isaiah: they both contemporize oracles of doom originally about Assyria to this Seleucid king. The Ḥor oracle contains a line, “The confirmation of this: the Queen bears a male child.” The queen must have been Cleopatra II, who would have given birth to this male child Ptolemy Eupator while she was a teenager. As in Isa 7:14, the birth of a male heir by a young mother while threatened by Syria served as a confirmation of the prophecy (van der Meer 2010). Van der Meer was right to admit these parallels do not indicate literary dependence. In most of the cases raised, the parallels (such as between Ḥor and Isa 7) are already present in the Hebrew. The few lexical parallels that are specifically Greek are not at all strong. The allegedly significant historical-cultural parallel exalting Memphis over the other cities is due (as van der Meer noted) to the translator’s misunderstanding of נשאו in Isa 19:13. Even the claim that the reception history of both the Egyptian oracles and Isaiah (evidenced by its Greek translation) both exemplify fulfilment interpretation regarding the Seleucid period (specifically Leontopolis around 140 BCE) assumes such an interpretive method is characteristic of the translator of Greek Isaiah. Christian interpreters since the Gospels have seen here a reference to Jesus’ birth. Even if sexual inexperience were the only meaning of παρθένος, G indicates that the mother was a virgin only at the time of the prophecy, not at the time of the birth. Lincoln demonstrates that Matthew’s account does not imply the conception took place without a male human, but only that the father was not Joseph. Usually the fathers quoted 7:14 to show that the scriptures prophesied the miraculous birth of Christ, but also to show that the Son had a physical body (Ignatius, Philippians 3). Justin Martyr bore witness to the Jewish interpretation that the prophecy referred to Hezekiah (Dial. 43 and 67). In response, Justin (Dial. 43, 48, 66, 67–71, 77f., 84) insisted that without a miraculous birth
there would be no “sign,” and therefore the mother must have been a virgin after a miraculous conception. Since Ἐμμανουήλ is given as a name, it is transliterated rather than translated.
15 The original reading of Sinaiticus, the infinitive ἐκλέξασθαι, shared with B (Swete), was changed to the future ἐκλέξεται by ca, cb2, in agreement with Q and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), providing a finite verb for this clause. Eusebius wrote, πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν ἀπειθεῖ πονηρίᾳ ἐκλέξασθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν.
16 Since the clause preceding καί was subordinated by διότι, the καὶ does not coordinate two clauses. It must therefore be understood adverbially.
18 The antecedent referent for the neuter singular relative pronoun ὃ is unclear. Nothing explicit matches its gender and number: day is feminine, flies are plural, Lord is masculine. Only the action itself could be neuter singular, but this makes little sense. Silva disregarded the singular form, rendering it “the flies that rule;” Ottley has “the flies, that which ruleth over….” Instead of the present κυριεύει, the reading also of S and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler); B (Swete) has the future κυριεύσει. The future is out of place here, since it is in parallel with the present ἐστιν. κυριεύει, normally takes its object in the genitive, therefore in Q, the genitive neuter noun μέρους is the object of κυριεύει and the neuter pronoun ὃ is the subject. The parallelism with the bees (who also inhabit a certain region) indicate an accusative, making the neuter relative pronoun ὃ nominative. Eusebius commented, ταύταις ταῖς ἀποδοθείσαις Αἰγυπτιακαῖς μυίαις συριεῖν ὁ κύριος εἴρηται, “The Lord is said to whistle for these recompensed Egyptian flies” (1.45).
19 The masculine form πάντες indicates it is people rather than flies or bees (both feminine) that will go out. Eusebius saw the “flies” and “bees” as metaphors for military forces (1.45). The Egyptians under Necho were during the time of Josiah, and the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar were from the
land of the Assyrians. They settled in the ravines and caves, but unsurprisingly, Eusebius made no mention of them on the trees. Note ξύλῳ makes a repeat appearance from earlier in this chapter.
20 ξυρήσει is the future of ξυράω, shave. The verb μεθύω means to get drunk, corresponding to the root שׁכר; μισθόω means to hire, corresponding to the root שׂכר. It is difficult to fit the prepositional phrase πέραν τοῦ ποταμοῦ into the sentence. It appears to express where the razor comes from. Silva and Ottley translated a different text, which includes the words ὅ ἐστιν before this phrase. Brenton thought the genitive βασιλέως Ἀσσυρίων modified ξυρῷ. Again, Silva and Ottley translated a different text, which does not have this difficulty. It is hard to tell whether the accusative τὰς τρίχας τῶν ποδῶν belongs with the preceding τὴν κεφαλήν (object of ξυρήσει) or the following τὸν πώγωνα (object of ἀφελεῖ). Brenton and Silva took it with the former, as object of ξυρήσει; Ottley preserved the ambiguity, with “shave … the head, and the hair of the feet, and the beard shall he take away.”
21 The noun δάμαλιν appeared previously in 5:18, translating the same Hebrew word. It is not made explicit whether raising a heifer and two sheep is an indication of abundance or scarcity. Eusebius saw it as πενίαν ὑπερβάλλουσαν “utter destitution” (1.47). The preceding verse implies captivity; the following verse, abundance.
22 The neuter πλεῖστον (superlative of πολύς) is used adverbially. The production (ποιεῖν) is “most abundant.” The phrase βούτυρον καὶ μέλι appeared earlier in 7:15, translating the same Hebrew words. There these appeared as the food the child would eat before he was of the age of understanding. The implication seems to be that “that day” would come within several years. Here the abundance of milk production is stated explicitly, which seems unexpected given the clear threat of verse 20 and the ambiguity of verse 21.
23 The σίκλος was a weight or coin named for the Hebrew שׁקל, but here it translates כסף. χέρσος refers to dry land as opposed to sea, but also dry land as opposed to fertile land, especially in the papyri.
24 The dart and arrow imply that hunters will travel to these uninhabited areas.
From barren to fertile land(7:25)[[@Bible:Isa 7:23-25]]
25 An improvement on Ottley’s or Brenton’s translations, that every mountain “shall be deeply ploughed” and “shall be certainly ploughed” is to take the literal translation of the Pual (passive) participle מעדר ἀροτριώμενον as indicating the arability of the land. Silva left the participle ambiguous: “every hill being plowed will be plowed.” Ottley and Brenton rendered the phrase as an emphatic because the main verb ἀροτριαθήσεται is cognate to the preceding participle ἀροτριώμενον. At first glance the sense of ἀπό here seems to be to indicate the cause of the clause: “because of the dry land and thorn, it will be….” But the presence of εἰς makes the ἀπό phrase refer to the previous (barren) state from which the new (fertile) state emerges. In contrast to previous instances of ἄκανθαι in this paragraph, in this verse we have the singular form ἀκάνθης. Note the parallel between the δάμαλιν βοῶν καὶ δύο πρόβατα from 7:21 and the προβάτου and βοός here. The noun καταπάτημα appeared earlier in 5:5, there the result of destroying the vineyard. It will appear again in paragraphs 84, 125, and 164, always as the object of εἰς.
1 Chapter 8 opens with a first-person narrative, reminiscent of chapter 6, in contrast to the third-person narrative of chapter 7. Lord speaks to the prophet, impregnates the prophetess, and the prophet names the son. Swete accented πρός με as πρὸς μέ. The accentuation Λάβε follows Swete and Ziegler; Rahlfs accents this as Λαβέ. It is unclear what the genitive καινοῦ μεγάλου is modifying. Silva has “a scroll of a new large one” with a note, “Or a leaf from a large new scroll.” Ottley has “a leaf of a new great sheet.” Eusebius understood these as attributive adjectives: τόμον καινὸν καὶ μέγαν (1.48). Katz accepted the emendation גורלfor גדול, and conjectured τόμον κλήρου as the original translation that later became corrupted as τόμον καινόν. μεγάλου was then added to the Greek after גדול had become the accepted Hebrew reading (Katz 1946). The significance of ἀνθρώπου modifying γραφίδι is unclear. Ottley and Silva both have simply “a man’s pen.” Eusebius claimed that the writing with a normal human pen (rather than writing with the power of God) was to maintain secrecy to keep rumours from circulating. The usual interpretation of the articular infinitive Τοῦ … ποιῆσαι is purpose, although Brenton translated, “concerning the making a rapid plunder of spoils.” It makes no sense for plunder to be the purpose of the writing, so I take this phrase to be the content of the writing (as
implied by Ottley and Silva). Harsh vocabulary is used in this writing: προνομή refers to foraging, the spoils of war, σκῦλον also means spoils or booty, goods taken violently, and ὀξέως is adverb of ὀξύς, sharp. The subject of πάρεστιν is not indicated. Ottley and Silva both took it as a neuter, with “it is at hand” and “it is near,” respectively. It is not clear whether πάρεστιν γάρ is included in what is written, or if it is the reason for writing. Eusebius said the writing was about the plundering from spoils quickly, i.e., the binding the strong man and plundering his goods described in Matt 12:29 and Luke 11:22. In his interpretation, the exact words to be written (γράφε ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα ἐν τῷ λεχθέντι τόμῳ) are: καὶ προσῆλθον πρὸς τὴν προφῆτιν, καὶ ἐν γαστρὶ ἔλαβεν καὶ ἔτεκεν υἱόν (1.48). In other words, it was to be a secret that the Lord was the one who impregnated the prophetess.
2 The document is binding enough to require witnesses. Swete accents μάρτυράς as μάρτυρὰς. The accusatives τὸν Οὐρίαν καὶ τὸν Ζαχαρίαν υἱὸν Βαραχίου are in apposition to ἀνθρώπους.
3 Because Q has a textual variant shared by S and A (third person singular rather than first person singular or third person plural), it is not clear who the third person subject of προσῆλθεν might be. The possible candidates are Isaiah, one of the witnesses, Achaz, and Lord, with problems associated with all of these. Isaiah does not fit as the subject of a third person verb because in this chapter he is the first person narrator. None of the three witnesses is singled out; they are mentioned together as plural, not singular. Achaz does not appear in this chapter, and his presence would have to be assumed based on the connection to the preceding chapter. Lord is the best candidate syntactically (as the last third-person subject); although a reader might be surprised that Lord would engage in a physical act, that is certainly how Eusebius interpreted it (1.48). As also in MT, there is no indication here who specifically τὴν προφῆτιν might refer to, other than the observation that the prophet’s wife might be called a prophetess, which would explain why the prophet is the one naming the son. Eusebius of course took this prophetess to be Mary. At least several months are telescoped into this one verse, several centuries in Eusebius’s interpretation. Eusebius explained, “he relates the things that are about to be as though they had already happened.”
4 The reason for the statement just made is introduced by διότι. A phrase similar to διότι πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον appeared earlier in 7:16 (πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι αὐτὸν in 7:15). The Hebrew is כי בטרם ידע הנער in both places (לדעתו in 7:15). The vocabulary σκῦλα recalls 8:1 and 8:3, and βασιλέως Ἀσσυρίων recalls 7:20 (and τὸν
βασιλέα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων in 7:17). The reason the boy is given such a quick and looting name is that the threatening powers will soon be despoiled.
The subject of λήμψεται could be the child or Lord, or someone indefinite. The child is preferable because he is the most recent subject, and Lord is speaking. Ottley has “(one) shall take”; Silva has “it will receive.” Both are reasonable interpretations. Eusebius took this to be the child (1.48). Eusebius included chapter 8 in the prophecy of Emmanuel (1.48). He said that at this point the Lords shifts from addressing Ahaz to addressing the prophet privately.
6 The phrase τὸνλαὸντοῦτον recalls 6:9, 10; in both cases, the people did not listen to Lord. Sheppard suggested that τοῦΣιλωάμ most probably represents a Hebrew dual form compressed in pronunciation as הַשִּׁלֹחָם(1915).
7 In response to this rebuff, Lord intends to send the king of the Assyrians, an expression that recalls 7:17. The present tense ἀνάγει is used to represent the Hebrew participle, which indicates the impending future. The phrase ἀναβήσεται ἐπί is a literal translation of עלה על. The imagery of water overflowing banks implies that the Assyrians will be just as unstoppable.
8 Along with sending this flood, Lord intends to eliminate anyone of power from Judea. G differs greatly from the MT in 8:8. NRSV reads “it will sweep on into Judah as a flood, and, pouring over, it will reach up to the neck; and its outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel.” Although G literally says Lord will remove a single person, the context demands that this be interpreted as if πάντα were added before ἄνθρωπον. Without this πάντα or a negative particle, the disjunctive particle ἤ is not what a reader would expect.
8 In 7:14, the Hebrew name was transliterated rather than translated as it is here Μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός. Matt 1:23 quotes 8:8 as καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ,
ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον μεθʼ ἡμῶνὁθεός, combining 7:14 with 8:8 or 8:10. Seeligmann saw fulfilment-interpretation here (1948, 83–86).
9 The presence of Lord among his people guarantees their victory. Any opponents will necessarily be foiled. Among the translated books of the OT, ἡσσάομαι appears only in Isaiah, 10 times, always translating the verb חתת, which elsewhere tends to be translated πτοέω. As an imperative (in the context of other imperatives), perhaps ἡττᾶσθε should be rendered “yield.” The participle ἰσχυκότες translates an imperative in the MT. In G the participle could be (a) temporal (as Brenton and Ottley took it, “when ye are waxed strong, be overcome”), (b) concessive (“although you have become strong, yield!”), or (c) vocative (as Eusebius understood it; “You who have become strong, be overcome”).
10 The accusative λόγον makes the syntax awkward, since parallelism indicates this “word” is functioning as the subject of ἐμμείνῃ. The nominative form would be expected here. The reason for the word not standing is introduced by ὅτι, namely, the presence of God. The implication is that any human plan or idea will be overwhelmed by God’s presence (and will). Eusebius explained that “whatever word you speak” means “threatening to do anything contrary to Emmanuel” (1.50).
11 The confidence that comes from God’s presence leads to the following advice: do not fear what this people fears. Put yourself on Lord’s side, and he will then be a help rather than an obstacle for you. Arie van der Kooij (van der Kooij 1997a; 1997c; 1989; 1998a, 14) and J. Ross Wagner (Wagner 2007) have written on OG Isaiah 8:11-16. More recently a special issue of Adamantius includes several articles on Greek Isaiah 8-9 (le Boulluec 2007; Fédou 2007; Dogniez 2007; van der Kooij 2007; Morlet 2007; Munnich 2007). Lord’s message is addressed to an unspecified group, which is plural until the middle of 8:13, then the second person pronouns switch to the singular. Eusebius said the Lord is now addressing Jews. “The strong hand” is an awkward expression in Greek, and the English is an attempt to imitate this. The article τῇ, unexpected in Greek, is present because the Hebrew has it, in כחזקת היד. The continued themes of strength (ἰσχυρᾷ in 8:11) and inappropriate speech (εἴπητε in 8:12) connect this paragraph to what precedes.
12 Instead of μήποτε (accented as Rahlfs and Ziegler, μηποτε in A and B), S has μή. That which the people are not to say, σκληρόν, could be an exclamation “Hard!” or a statement “[It is] hard.” Silva translated, “Never say ‘Hard,’ for whatever this people says is hard.” Ottley has “Never speak ye stubbornly; for all that this people speaketh is stubborn.” In this context, perhaps like our “hardly” it is an expression of skepticism and improbability. The Hebrew of course is a different word, קשׁר (conspiracy), which was apparently read as קשׁה (hard), confusing resh with he. The reading ἐὰν agrees with S and with Ziegler (who included no note regarding A), but Ottley (with no note) and B (Swete notes only S with a variant) have ἂν. Normally the object of φοβέομαι would the thing feared, not fear (τὸν φόβον) itself. They are not to fear fear, or be troubled (aorist passive subjunctive of ταράσσω).
13 The proper source of one’s help is Lord, emphasized with the pronoun αὐτόν, which is a literal translation of the Hebrew emphatic אתו. The second person verb is plural, but the second person pronoun is singular. Instead of φόβος, as with all other manuscripts (and Swete, Rahlfs, Ziegler), S has βοηθός. The Hebrew is מורא, which was translated by φόβος in verse 12. 1 Pet 3:15 alludes to Isa 8:13 with κύριον δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν ἁγιάσατε, identifying Christ as Lord.
Jacob and Jerusalem powerless(8:14-18)[[@Bible:Isa 8:11-15]]
14 Those ἐγκαθήμενοι Jerusalem (from ἐν-κάθημαι) are caught in two ways: in a παγίς (snare), and in a κοίλασμα (an indentation, cavity or hollow).
15 The third-person plural subject of πεσοῦνται is most likely the powerless who sit in Jerusalem. The fate of these trapped people is predicted by the future passive of συντρίβω, which means to destroy by breaking apart. Q and A read ἀσφαλείᾳ ὄντες (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Sinaiticus corrector cb2
changed S*’s ἀσφαλείᾳ (the reading also of B) to ἀσφαλείᾳ ὄντες (in line with Q and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but this change was reverted by cb3. Corrector cb2’s addition of ὄντες after ἀσφαλείᾳ resolves an ambiguity regarding what ἀσφαλείᾳ modifies: the action (happening “with confidence”) or the people (“secure”). The text of Q, A, and cb2 (which Rahlfs and Ziegler accept) makes it explicit that it is the people who are secure.
16 The accusative object τὸν νόμον could be the object of σφραγιζόμενοι or μαθεῖν. Syntactically the former is preferable; semantically, the latter. The intention is probably both: seal up the law so that one cannot learn it. The identity of those who seal it (σφραγιζόμενοι) is unclear. Arie van der Kooij understood them to be the speakers of 8:12-14, the opponents of the “hard” torah-obedience of “this people.” Wagner, on the other hand, argued that the speakers in 8:12-14 are the faithful, and those who seal up the law are those who seek help from mediums and do not trust in the Lord (263). These sealers will be φανεροί, which carries the meaning of “readily known,” but it is unclear whether this means they are exposed for who they are, or simply famous. Ottley, van der Kooij, and Silva translated it as “manifest.”
17 The most recent singular subject for ἐρεῖ is the house of Iakob in 8:14. The Hebrew has no counterpart to these words. πεποιθώς recalls 8:13.
19 The expression τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς φωνοῦντας καὶ τοὺς ἐγγαστριμύθους refers to mediums (compare ἐγγαστρίμαντις: “one that prophesies from the belly.”) The Hebrew has the somewhat less explicit “the ghosts and the spirits, those who chirp and those who mutter.” Note the connection between κοιλίας and κοιλάσματι in 8:14. The subject of εἴπωσιν is presumably those who have sealed the law in 8:16. The plural addressees (ὑμᾶς) presumably are resumed from 8:12, where the second person pronouns were plural (in 8:13-14 they were singular).
The identity of the speaker asking οὐκ ἔθνος πρὸς θεὸν αὐτοῦ is not specified. The one asking the question could be the mediums (as Ottley), or the speakers of verse 19 (the subject of εἴπωσιν), or Isaiah (as Silva). It is unclear how this question is supposed to support the any of these speakers’ points. One possibility is that they are suggesting contacting the local practitioners rather than those that are far away in Zion. Ottley reads, “Seek ye them that speak from the earth, and the ventriloquists, the babblers that talk from the belly: is it not a nation with its God?” However, the next question more clearly supports Isaiah’s point that diviners should not be consulted, so I interpret this preceding rhetorical question the same way: that the nation of Judea has its God, namely Lord, and he is the one to be consulted. Hence the questioner here would be Isaiah. Silva translated, “And if people say to you, ‘Seek those who utter sounds from the earth and the ventriloquists, the babblers who utter sounds out of their bellies,’ should not a nation be with its God? Why do they seek out the dead concerning the living?”
20 The reason for the law was so that they would not say “such things” (ὡς τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο). The syntax of περὶ οὗ οὐκ ἔστιν δῶρα δοῦναι περὶ αὐτοῦ is awkward but sensible, with a resumptive pronoun in a relative clause. What is difficult about this phrase is the meaning. On the surface, the clause says there are no gifts to give about this word, but what “gifts” might be given about a word is unclear. Ottley translated, “For he hath given them a law for their help: that they may speak not as this word, concerning which there is no giving of gifts.” Silva translated, “For he has given a law as a help so that they may not speak a word such as this one, concerning which there are no gifts to give.” Unlike the diviners, Lord requires no gifts to buy his help.
21 The recurrence of σκληρά recalls 8:12. ὡς ἂν with the subjunctive (πεινάσητε) indicates the time of an event in the future (BDAG s.v. ὡς 8c). The speech implied by κακῶς ἐρεῖτε presumably refers to the same kind of speech as τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο of 8:20. Instead of πατριά (the reading also of S, A, and B), Rahlfs and Ziegler both have παταχρα, following 93 (and noting the same word in Isa 37:38). Since the ruler τὸν ἄρχοντα is in parallel with the ancestral customs, he is presented with approval here. Note the shift to the third person in ἀναβλέψονται. The subject is not immediately obvious. The ἄρχοντα is not a good candidate because he is singular. In conjunction with the following verse, it seems that looking up is presented as a bad thing to do, presumably because it is seeking answers from diviners. So the plural subjects from 8:19 are probably indicated: those who have sealed, and who recommend diviners.
22 Again, they look (ἐμβλέψονται) for answers in the wrong places. What they will see there is not what they are seeking.
8:23-
23 The syntax of 8:23 is awkward; its interpretation even less clear. Ottley has, “And he that is in straitness shall not be dismayed until a season.” Similarly, Silva has, “and the one who is in distress will not be perplexed for a time.” The Hebrew כי לא מועף לאשׁר מוצק לה כעת is difficult, literally “Indeed no gloom for whom anxiety for her. As a time …” Ottley showed that G was translating phrase by phrase: כי לא מועף=Indeed not being gloomy=καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται; לאשׁר מוצק לה=which has anxiety=ὃ ἐν στενοχωρίᾳ; כעת=as a time=ὡς καιροῦ.
The verb ἀπορέω normally means to be at a loss, whether for goods or ideas. In the previous verse (8:22), G rendered a noun מעוף from this same root, so because he understood the form as a participle, he translated it with a future passive form of the cognate verb ἀπορέω. To preserve the play on words, I have translated “in difficulty.” The meaning then is that difficulty they see in 8:22 will not begin immediately.
1 Two differences of division appear at the boundary between chapters 8 and 9. One is the division of the last verses of chapter 8; the other is where chapter 9 begins. Rahlfs follows the MT. Ziegler follows Swete. The English versions follow the MT for verse division, but not for chapter division, and consequently not for verse numbering. The MT begins verse 23 with the words corresponding to καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται and English versions begin chapter 9 here, but Swete keeps these words in verse 22. Swete begins chapter 9 beginning with Τοῦτο πρῶτον, which is partway through the MT’s 8:23. Rahlfs begins a new paragraph there, but does not start chapter 9 until ὁ λαός, following the MT. Therefore the verse numbering in the rest of chapter 9 is one less in the MT and Rahlfs than in Swete, Ziegler, and the English versions. The numbering in Brenton and both Ottley’s translations (Heb. and LXX) agree with Swete’s. Silva’s numbering follows Ziegler.
Although Q*, A, B and S all read πίε, Rahlfs and Ziegler transcribed ποίει, following a marginal note in Q. The imperative πίε is to drink, but just what is to be drunk is not specified. Ottley conjectured that the original reading was a literal translation of the Hebrew: ΠΡΩΤΟΝΤΑΧΥΕΠΕΙΤΑΠΑΧΥΠΟΙΕΙ which by scribal error became ΠΡΩΤΟΝ———-ΠΙΕ—–ΤΑΧΥΠΟΙΕΙ. Matthew 4:15 is not much help because its quotation begins after this difficulty. Matt 4:15-16
quotes this verse as γῆ Ζαβουλὼν καὶ γῆ Νεφθαλείμ, ὁδὸν θαλάσσης πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν, ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐν σκότει φῶς εἶδεν μέγα, καὶ τοῖς καθημένοις ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς. Likewise, Christ’s Descent into Hell 2:1 cites it as ὁ προφήτης Ἡσαἰας ἐκεῖ παρὼν εἶπε· τοῦτο τὸ φῶς ἐκ τοῦ πατρός ἐστι καὶ ἐκ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος· περὶ οὗ προεφήτευσα ἔτι ζῶν λέγων· γῆ Ζαβουλὼν καὶ γῆ Νεφθαλείμ, ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐν σκότει ἴδε φῶς μέγα. As it is, we have two singular imperatives addressed to the inhabitants of Zaboulon, Nephthaleim, the seaside, the trans-Jordan, Galilee, and Judea: drink this, and do it quickly! ,
2 The noun μέρος is a technical word for “district” in the papyri (Seeligmann 1948, 81; Johann Lust 1998, 161). Hanhart connected the joy here with the joy Simon Maccabee brought in 1 Macc 5:23. ,
3 Q has two instances of the verb εὐφραίνομαι, and another of the cognate noun, εὐφροσύνη. MT has three words from the root שׂמח and one other verb of rejoicing, יָגִילוּ.
They are gladdened ἐνἀμήτῳ; which could be refer to either the time or the product of harvest. For the expression ὃν τρόπον see the comment at 5:24. They will be as happy as those who divide up or distribute (διαιρέω) the spoils of war.
4 Rahlfs and Ziegler disagreed about ἀφαιρεθήσεται; the MT has no word corresponding to it. The verb ἀπαιτέω as a translation appears mainly in Isaiah, rendering נגשׂ here and in 14:4, נשים in 3:12 (probably a misreading), and תפת in 30:3. What Lord does to the rod (διασκεδάννυμι) usually refers to scattering or dispersal. The day of Madiam might have been understood as a day in which Madiam was punished. See the note on 2:12.
5 The perfect participle of ἐπισυνάγω is used to provide the first image of the restoration. The noun καταλλαγή is generally an exchange; in NT usage, it is a change from enmity to friendship, i.e., reconciliation. Finally, ἀποτίνω is often used to refer to compensation for damages. In addition to Q, Swete also spelled ἀποτείσουσιν as ἀποτίσουσιν. On the form, see BDF §23. The Hebrew behind θελήσουσιν εἰ ἐγενήθησαν πυρίκαυστοι is לשׂרפה מאכלת אשׁ, which means “and it will be for burning – fire fuel.” Although Ottley’s judgement is overstated, that “the rest of the verse seems to have been beyond the translators’ knowledge,” G did apparently struggle with this clause, recognizing the ideas “be” “fire” and “burn,” but failing to make sense of them.
6 The conjunction ὅτι parallels the one at the beginning of verses 4 and 5. All three provide the reason for the happiness described in 9:3: Lord has ended their oppression, their property will be returned, and now a great leader has been born to them. Since the καί before ἐδόθη is not at the beginning of the clause, it must be adverbial, which would be unexpected in an otherwise parallel set of statements. The noun ἄγγελος generally means a messenger. In biblical usage of course this often refers to an divine (angelic) messenger, but here, the messenger is from a council, so he might be termed an envoy. At first glance, the genitive relative pronoun in the relative clause οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ appears to modify ἡ ἀρχή (“whose beginning”), but by the end of the clause it appears that we have a genitive personal pronoun resuming the genitive relative pronoun (“on whose shoulders”). The three words μεγάλη βουλῆς ἄγγελος are G’s original translation.
Ziegler indicates that this section is marked by a obelus in 88 and the Syrohexapla. The same words added by Sinaiticus corrector ca, θαυμαστὸς σύμβουλος θεὸς ἰσχυρός ἐξουσιαστής, ἄρχων εἰρήνης πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, are included in the manuscripts Alexandrinus, 106, 26, Venetus, 109, 736, the full Lucianic family of manuscripts (albeit with an asterisk in 22, 48, 51, 231, and 763) including 46, 233, 456 , the corrector to 764, 87, 91, 309, 490, 377, 564, 565, 403, 613, 407, 538, 770, except that
Alexandrinus and 26 omit θεός, 109 and 736 transpose θαυμαστός συμβουλος with θεος ισχυρος They are also added in the Syropalestinian translation, Eusebius (Dem. ev.), Athanasius, Chrysostom, and possibly Theodoret. Clementhastheslightlyshorterθαυμαστοςσυμβουλοςθεοςδυναστηςπατηραιωνιοςαρχωνειρηνης. Other manuscripts not listed here do not include these additional words. Most but not all of the words in the addition to S can be traced to interpolation from the Three; the exceptions are εξουσιαστης and του μελλοντος. Aquilahasθαυμαστος συμβουλοςισχυρος δυνατος πατηρ ετι αρχων ειρηνης. Symmachushas παραδοξασμος βουλευτικος ισχυρος δυνατος πατηραιωνοςαρχων ειρηνης. Theodotionhasθαυμαστος βουλευων ισχυρος δυναστηςπατηραιωνιοςαρχων ειρηνης. Ottley (1904, 1:2:155-156) summarized why these words are not “part of the true LXX. text: they are not in the earliest manuscripts S* and B (or Q); they are largely a duplicate rendering of μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος; the wording is close (but not identical) to that of the Three (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion). Ottley proposed that these words came from the version Theodotion revised (known from Daniel). Le Moigne noted that not only here in 9:6 but also in 22:21 G refrains from giving a person the title “father” even though that is what the Hebrew text has; at the same time, G attributes royal features to these (2008). Because in comparison to the Hebrew, the human messianic figure’s role has been reduced to that of a messenger, Johann Lust (1998) and John Collins (2008) disagreed with those (e.g., Coppens 1968) who claimed G enhances the messianic character of Isaiah’s oracles. (See also van der Kooij 2002.) Trigg compared Origen’s
use of the title “Angel of Great Counsel,” applied to Christ, to the image of the son as seraph in Isaiah 6 (1991). In place of γὰρ ἄξω, B’s reading is probably due to the absence of ἐγώ, so that γάρ falls in the second position in the sentence.
7 The infinitives κατορθῶσαι αὐτὴν καὶ ἀντιλαβέσθαι most simply would be understood as expressing purpose. ἀντιλαμβάνω usually takes its object in the genitive; here (in Q, as well as in A) it includes αὐτῆς, as does the Hebrew. The pronoun ταῦτα presumably refers to the birth of the child, and the peace that comes from his just government. ζῆλος means “intense positive interest,” according to BDAG, hence “eagerness” in the translation.
8 Earlier instances of ἐπί in G have carried a hostile sense, which certainly fits here with Lord sending θάνατον. Because the verbs in parallel (ἀπέστειλεν and ἦλθεν) both denote motion, yet the thing being moved is the object of ἀποστέλλω but the subject of ἔρχομαι, the semantic parallelism suggests the subject of ἦλθεν is death, not Lord.
9 The theme of arrogance reappears, confirming this as one of the main sins according to Isaiah.
10 The aorist subjunctive κόψωμεν (also in B) appears amongst other subjunctives, as the other uncials have it: the future ἐκκόψομεν in S; ἐκκόψωμεν in A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). In addition to Q, manuscripts A and B (followed by Swete, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) add another tree species, κέδρους.
11 The verb ἐπανίστημι denotes hostile uprising. Q (along with B and S corrector ca) contains the singular αὐτόν where S*, cb2, A (Rahlfs, Ziegler) read the plural αὐτοὺς. The singular form would refer to God; the plural would match the upcoming αὐτῶν. Silva has “And God will strike those who rise up against them on Mount Sion,” but the ἐπί immediately after the verb that also begins with ἐπί would more naturally be taken as the object of the verb, rather than the location at which the action indicated by ῥάξει takes place.
12 The Hebrew behind Συρίαν is ארם. This is a case of non-interpretive updating, since there is no change of referent. For another case, see the river in 27:12, which is called the “River of Egypt” in Hebrew, but the “Rhinokorouron” in Greek, with no difference in meaning. The expression ἡλίου ἀνατολῶν refers to the East, and ἡλίου δυσμῶν to the West. The Hebrew behind Ἕλληνας is פלשׁתים. This is a case of interpretive updating, since there is a change of referent (the Philistines are not the same as the Greeks), but not enough to be considered “actualization.” Those inhabiting Philistia in the translator’s time would have been Greek-speakers. Syria and the Greeks are presented as enemies of Israel, attacking it from both sides.
12 In 5:25 we had the words ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή; this expression appears again in 9:17 and in 10:4. In 5:25, the preposition is unique; here the order τούτοις πᾶσιν is unique (but see the textual variants at 10:4). It is not stated explicity whose the wrath (θυμός) is.
13 The singular form ἀπεστράφη is repeated from the preceding verse. The collocation τὸν κύριον is a rare instance of the article preceding κύριος. The verb ἐξεζήτησαν is plural, despite the singular subject ὁ λαός and verbs ἀπεστράφη and ἐπλήγη.
Rahlfs, following the MT, places the division between 9:14 and 15 (his 9:13 and 14) after ἡμέρᾳ. Swete and Ziegler divide the verses after ἀρχή.
14 The complementary extremes head and οὐράν (an animal’s tail) and great and small convey completeness.
15 πρεσβύτην … προφήτην are still the objects of ἀφεῖλεν, in apposition to κεφαλὴν καὶ οὐράν as well as μέγαν καὶ μικρόν. Rahlfs put αὕτη ἡ ἀρχή and οὗτος ἡ οὐρά in parentheses as explanatory glosses. ἀρχή here translates ראשׁ, as did κεφαλήν. It can refer to leadership or beginning, as also in 19:11, 13; 43:9, 13. The phrase τοὺς τὰ πρόσωπα θαυμάζοντας is more literally rendered, “the ones who admire the faces.” The reason τοὺς θαυμάζοντας is accusative is because it (like κεφαλὴν, οὐράν, μέγαν, μικρὸν, and πρεσβύτην) is an object of ἀφεῖλεν. The accusative object of θαυμάζοντας is πρόσωπα, which is a standard literal translation, but θαυμάζοντας is not; it is an unusual translation of נשׂא “lift.”
16 The English standard gloss “bless” for μακαρίζω is misleading. As BDAG notes, it means “to call or consider someone especially favored,” hence “congratulate” (LSJ) in this context. The phrase τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον carries negative connotations for a reader of G, since it was used to refer to the rebellious people of Israel in 6:8 and 8:6.
17 The happiness expressed by εὐφρανθήσεται recalls 9:3.
For discussion of Ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τούτοις οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή see the note at 9:12, where it also occurs.
18 LSJ identifies ἄγρωστις as dog’s-tooth grass, Cynodon Dactylon, and δάσος as a thicket or copse. The genitive τῶν βουνῶν is partitive in function.
19 The two words θυμός and ὀργή are synonyms in G. The tense of συγκέκαυται is perfect, a literal rendering of the Hebrew qatal form, but the time reference is future.
20 The obscure phrase ἐκκλινεῖ εἰς τὰ δεξιά is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The same is true of φάγεται ἐκ τῶν ἀριστερῶν again, a literal translation of the Hebrew, with the resulting Greek obscure. The meaning in Hebrew is that although they devour everything left and right, they are not satisfied. G changed the meaning of the Hebrew by his choice of conjunctions: ἀλλά, and ὅτι.
21Ephraim and Manasseh are to besiege (πολιορκέω) Judah together. The genitive τοῦ is used rather than accusative, probably because a partitive sense is intended. Eusebius said they will devour the arms of one another (1.56).For πᾶσι τούτοις (πᾶσιν τούτοις in S), the other uncials A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have τούτοις πᾶσιν. See the note on 9:12.
1 A pair of woes (10:1, 5) begin the next two sections. The first condemns those who use their privilege (τοῖς γράφουσιν, the ability to write) to distort justice for the marginalized. The participle γράφοντες could indicate the time or the manner in which how they write; the temporal use fits the following verse better. Tertullian, Marc. 4.14 and 27, used Isa 10:1-2 as an example of how God inveighs against oppressors of the needy. Eusebius said this describes writers of false prophecies, presumably referrring to non-canonical Jewish scriptures (1.57). They write wickedness; the first πονηρίαν is the object of γράφουσιν since there must be a clause break one word before the postpositive particle γάρ; the second instance of πονηρίαν could be the object of the participle (“when they write wickedness, they write perverting…”) or of the finite verb (“when they write, they write wickedness, perverting…”). Instead of the second πονηρίαν (the reading also of S, A, and B and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler transcribed πόνον, hard work (with MT), citing in support only L′-96c, that is 22, 48, 51, 231, 763, 620, 147, and the corrector of 96.
2 Τhe participle form ἐκκλίνοντες indicates what form the writing wickedness takes. Although the intransitive sense of ἐκκλίνω is to turn aside (Gen 38:16), the transitive meaning is to bend or change (alter a name in Plato Cratylus 404d). So when justice is the object “pervert” is a close English approximation. Beggars, labourers, widows, and orphans are the representatives of the marginalized. The reading κρίματα of Q and S is plural in contrast to the singular κρίμα that appears in A, B (adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Possibly two words are meant: κρίμα τά, but this would mean ἁρπάζοντες had two accusative objects. πενήτων appears without an article, giving an indefinite sense. Instead of the dative αὐτοῖς (as found in A, B, S correctors ca and cb3, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S* has the accusative αὐτούς. There is a number mismatch between a plural pronoun and a singular noun in εἶναι αὐτοῖς χήραν, but this is possibly explained by the coordinated noun ὀρφανὸν later in the sentence. In the Gospels, ἁρπαγή refers to greed, but in the LXX it tends to refer to seized property. Eusebius said the false prophecies are lawless,
and lawless people seized everything from the inexperienced, orphans, and widows (1.57). The reference to scribes (who write) devouring widows’ houses in Mark 12:40 alludes to this passage.
3 The prophet warns of the “day of punishment” ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς. This day is referred to by 1 Peter 2:12 as ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς, when the Gentiles will glorify God after seeing his readers’ good deeds. The original reading of Sinaiticus τῇ ἡμέρᾳ (shared with B) was changed by cb2 to ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, (agreeing with Q and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but with no change of meaning, possibly under influence from 1 Peter 2:12 (ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς). The prophet then begins addressing the scribes in the second person, asking what good their seized property will do them then, and where they will hide their δόξαν so that it cannot be repossessed.The prototypical meaning of δόξα is opinion. Most commonly though,it is a positive opinion of reputation, so glory or splendour. But in the context of leaving the δόξαν somewhere, it might refer to material possessions, “riches,” as in Gen 31:16 πάντα τὸν πλοῦτον καὶ τὴν δόξαν, ἣν ἀφείλατο ὁ θεὸς.Note the change from third to second person in ὑμῶν.
4 The prophecy against the wicked scribes concludes the same way as 9:12: ἐπὶ τούτοις πᾶσιν οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή. Instead of ὁ θυμός (the reading also of A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has ἡ ὀργή; the two are synonymous in G.
5 Whereas the first “woe” was directed to the scribes who administered justice, the second “woe” is directed at first glace to the Assyrians. Both are in the dative case after Οὐαί. The normal interpretation of the dative Ἀσσυρίοις after οὐαί is that that woe is directed to the Assyrians, who wield (rather than experience) God’s wrath. Eusebius said at this point the subject of the prophecy transitions from being Israel to the Assyrians. God raised up the Assyrians as his rod, and delivered into their hands, so that the anger and wrath would come upon the lawless nation who was supposed to be his people (1.58). According to his understanding, the woe is not to the Assyrians, but because of the Assyrians. The reading of Vaticanus has the nominative and adds the article, ἡ ὀργή, so that the rod and the wrath are in their hand.
6 The prophecy then refers to sending wrath against a lawless nation, plundering, and changing of mind, but in a way that makes it difficult to discern who is doing each of these. The Assyrians could be the lawless nation, but so could Israel, as Eusebius read it. Although normally “my people” would refer to Israel, if Lord is using the Assyrians for his purposes, they too could be called “my people.” The phrase σκῦλα καὶ προνομήν recalls the same plunder vocabulary seen in the last few chapters.
7 The prophecy refers to someone not planning this, but it is not explicitly stated who did not plan, and what unplanned thing is happening. The most recent possible referent for the subject αὐτός is λαός, the lawless nation of 10:6, hence the translation “it,” but this identification runs into problems in 10:8. Eusebius understands the referent to be Assyria (Ὁ δὲ Ἀσσύριος τὴν παρ’ ἐμοῦ λαβὼν ἐξουσίαν οὐχ οὕτως ἐνεθυμήθη, 1.58). In this case, the phrase οὐχ οὕτως ἐνεθυμήθη means this is not the way the lawless nation planned it. Instead of the future indicative ἀπαλλάξει (the reading also of S, A, and B and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured the infinitive ἀπαλλάξαι, with the note “scripsi: cf. Hi. (ut conterat)]-ξει codd.gr.et verss.” But the infinitive does not fit the nominative subject. Instead of καὶ τοῦ ἐξολεθρεῦσαι ἔθνη as with A (and followed by Ziegler), S hs ἔθνη ἐξολεθρεῦσαι, B has καὶ τοῦ ἔθνη ἐξολοθρεῦσαι, and Rahlfs has καὶ τοῦ ἔθνη ἐξολεθρεῦσαι. Both verbs mean the same thing. Much like Joseph’s comment to his brothers in Genesis 50:20 that what they planned for evil, God planned for good, Isaiah affirms that Lord’s plans happen no matter the intentions of the agents.
8 The subject of εἴπωσιν is either indefinite, or the nations just mentioned. The referent of αὐτῷ would at first glance appear to be the same as in the preceding verses, but here the addressee appears to be an individual rather than a nation. Likely the nation is simply being personified.
9 Οὐκ introduces a question expecting an affirmative answer.
10 Since the first instance of καί is not coordinating two clauses, this must be an adverbial use.
10 Clement of Alexandria quoted 10:10-11 in Exhortation 8, in a warning not to be idolators, saying those who wail are not the idols themselves, but those who trust in them. The verb ὀλολύζω is onomatopoetic, just as its Hebrew counterpart אליל.
11 The vocative τὰ γλυπτά is here synonymous with χειροποιητα and εἰδωλα. In the phrase ἐποίησα Σαμαρείᾳ, the verb ποιέω with dative indicates treatment (BDAG s.v. ποιέω 4). The presence of ἐν in Q and S breaks the formal parallelism with Samaria. With a city as its object, the natural reading is that the prepositional phrase indicates the location of the action. The way that Lord treated Samaria and her hand-made things will be the same as how he treats in Jerusalem.
12 The complement of συντελέω should be an infinitive or a noun in the accusative, not a nominative participle such as ποιῶν. The Hebrew here is a noun, מעשׂהו. The use of νοῦν recalls 10:7, where the νοῦς would change to destroy nations. The accusative case in τὸν ἄρχοντα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων is ambiguous. It could be part of the preposition phrase in apposition to τὸν νοῦν τὸν μέγαν, or (more likely, since there is no other object of this transitive verb) the object of ἐπάξει. Ottley and Silva both supplied an object: “he shall turn (his hand) against the mighty mind, against the ruler of the Assyrians;” “he will bring his wrath against the great mind, the ruler of the Assyrians,” respectively.
13 The subject of εἶπεν is the νοῦς against whom Lord is bringing punishment. His boast consists of future first person verbs, such as ἀφελῶ, the future of ἀφαιρέω, and προνομεύσω, which is cognate with the noun προνομή, plunder. Before both instances of τῇ, B has ἐν, which matches the Hebrew more literally. The division between 10:13 and 14 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 14 after καὶ σείσω πόλεις κατοικουμένας, and Swete/Ziegler
begin verse 14 before these words.
14 νοσσιά can refer to a brood of young birds, but the context with eggs here demands a nest. In Greek, it is not necessary to explicitly identify the person to whom the body part belongs, but it is in English, so “my” is supplied in the translation. God takes the world in his hand as easily as a human would take a nest in his hand. Q, S, Swete and Ottley spell καταλελειμμένα ᾠὰ as καταλελιμμένα ὠὰ. On the spelling of ᾠόν see BDF §26. The future middle διαφεύξεταί translates a Qal participle, as does the aorist subjunctive of ἀντιλέγω (ἀντεῖπον). Clement of Alexandria quoted 10:14 in Exhortation8, between a warning against idolatry and a proof of God’s wisdom. He used the same verse in Strom. 5.14, claiming Orpheus got his idea of God’s grasp of the universe from Isaiah and Jeremiah. Hippolytus’s Antichr. 16 quotes 10:12-17 as referring to Antichrist. Chrysostom used 10:14 to show the folly of priding oneself in one’s wisdom (Homily 20, on Romans 12:3.
15 The negative μή introduces questions expecting a negative answer, as in, “An axe (ἀξίνη) will not be glorified without the one who cuts with it, will it?” In parallel with the axe is πρίων, a saw. The meaning of ὡσαύτως ἐάν is “the same applies to…” The expression καὶ οὐχ οὕτως is very awkward. Ottley rendered it “as if one should lift a rod or staff, and not thus?” Silva used the more sensible “Just so would it be if someone were to lift a rod or a log. But not so!” G read לכן as two words: לא כן, which would be literally translated as οὐχ οὕτως. The division between 10:15 and 16 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 16 after καὶ οὐχ οὕτως, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words.
16 Instead of the future indicative ἀποστελεῖ as also in A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S* has the aorist subjunctive ἀποστείλῃ. The preposition εἰς is puzzling before τὴν σὴν δόξαν. The normal meaning of εἰς, in which there is motion or at least change, does not fit here. Eusebius simply quoted the phrase without explanation. Brenton has “fire shall be kindled upon thy glory,” Ottley translated, “fire shall burn against thy glory,” and Silva translated, “fire will burn on your glory.” The meaning from the
context, especially the parallel clause, is clear enough: fire will cause the glory to disappear and be replaced by dishonour.
17 The words ἔσται … εἰς are a literal translation of the Hebrew. Instead of the nominative χόρτος, A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the accusative χόρτον. In G, the fire is nonsensically compared to hay, consuming the wood. Origen (Princ. 2.10) used Isa 10:17 to argue that God’s fury helps purify souls. He used the same verse to show that ὕλη is not “matter” of the sort that bodies are made of (Princ. 4.1.32).
18 The division between 10:17 and 18 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 18 after τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words. In Q the paragraph begins with these words, so my text division agrees with Swete and Ziegler here, against Rahlfs. The verb ἀποσβέννυμι normally means extinguish (a fire), and by extension can mean other kinds of coming to an end. The prepositional phrase ἀπὸ ψυχῆς ἕως σαρκῶν describes the extent of the consumption.
19 G moved the Hebrew preposition out of the phrase מספר יהיו into the preceding ἀπʼ αὐτῶν. Lust suggested that ἀριθμός may mean “census” in 2 Chr 2:16. Certainly the people are being counted. The plural object in παιδίον γράψει αὐτούς is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The image is that the number will be so small that a child can record it, as Eusebius explained, τοσοῦτοι ἔσονται ὡς δύνασθαι καὶ τὸ τυχὸν παιδίον τὸν ἀριθμὸν αὐτῶν παραλαβεῖν καὶ γραφῇ παραδοῦναι τοῦ λοιποῦ πλήθους ἀπολωλότος (1.59).
20 In a translation from Hebrew, προστίθημι usually means “add” when there is an indirect object, or “continue” when there is an infinitive, but here in the passive form with no indirect object, it is difficult to see to what the remnant is being added. Muraoka (2009, 599) said the use here is elliptical, and resumed by a finite verb. In this case the meaning is that the remnant will no longer continue to trust in those who wronged them. But in order to preserve the awkwardness of the Greek, I opted for a more literal translation. The dative τῇ ἀληθείᾳ indicates that they will truly trust the holy God of Israel.
The remnant will be saved(10:22-26)[[@Bible:Isa 10:20-23]]
22 The two words συντελῶν and συντέμνων sound alike; this similarity of sound is not present in the Hebrew כליון חרוץ שׁוטף. The periphrastic nominative participles need a subject, and “is” must be supplied in English, “who is fulfilling and cutting?” The only subject available to the reader is ὁ λαός, but the subject in 10:23, where these two words are recalled, is Lord. Eusebius simply quoted the phrase, and interpreted based on Isa 10:23. G uses συντέμνω also in 10:23 and 28:22, all translating חרץ. Daniel has συντέμνω twice, once for חרץ, and once for the hapax legomenon חתך.
23 The two words λόγον συντετμημένον bring together two parts of the preceding verse. Normally with συντέμνω, λόγον would be expected to refer to a narrative rather than finances, but both are possible. The reading of B, Κύριος rather than ὁ θεός, is probably influenced by Rom 9:27-28, where Paul mentioned Isa 10:22-23: Ἠσαΐας δὲ κράζει ὑπὲρ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ· Ἐὰν ᾖ ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης, τὸ ὑπόλειμμα σωθήσεται λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶ συντέμνων ποιήσει κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. Paul is likely quoting not Isaiah but Hosea 1:10 Καὶ ἦν ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης for the sand image. Two themes were picked up in the early Christian writers: (1) God making a shortened word in the whole earth, and (2) though Israel be like the sand of the sea, yet a remnant shall be saved (the passage quoted in Romans), by Cyprian (Dom. or. 28; Test. 2.3); Justin, Dial. 64; Chrysostom, Homily 16 on Romans 9, and Homily 2 on 2 Cor 1:11; Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed.
24 G consistently renders אשׁור as plural Ἀσσυρίων, except for once in 31:8 as Ασσουρ. The ὅτι before ῥάβδῳ πατάξει σε could express the reason not to be frightened (in the sense of Brenton’s and Silva’s “because” or Ottley’s “for”) or the content of the fear (“that”). Eusebius gave the reason they should not be frightened: although the Assyrians will strike with a rod, it is only for a little while. Ottley noted that this latter interpretation is the likely Hebrew meaning (Ottley 1904, 1:2.163). The subject of the singular verb πατάξει is unspecified. In Hebrew, Assyria fits because it is singular, but G has the plural Assyrians. God would be a natural choice as well, but then a first-person verb would be expected, as we have later in ἐπάξω. Eusebius saw here the king of the Assyrians (1.61). The word πληγὴν in 10:26 is anticipated. Matthijs J. de Jong identified (with the help of Neo-Assyrian texts) two layers in Isaiah
10:24-27, the first (10:24-25) from the time of Sargon (720 BCE) and the second (10:26-27) from the time of Josiah. The phrase “the road of Egypt” means not “as the Egyptians did” but is a name for the road to Egypt, “the Egypt Road” (de Jong 2010).
25 The object of Lord’s wrath is their βουλή, their plan or scheme (Penner 2019).
26 In Q (in slightly different order in A and B, Rahlfs and Ziegler), God will cause some unspecified antagonist to rise up against them; the textual reading in S says that God will cause them to rise up. This rising will correspond to the πληγή, a blow that causes a wound. The lack of the article τήν before Μαδιάμ in Q and B of course allows for the indeclinable noun to be genitive rather than accusative (as in S and A, Rahlfs and Ziegler). There is no explicit verb for the nominative subject ὁ θυμὸς; this verbless clause is in a future context. The phrase τῇ ὁδῷ τῇ κατὰ θάλασσαν recalls the ὁδὸν θαλάσσης in 9:1. Eusebius identified the way toward Egypt (τὴνὁδὸντὴνκατʼ Αἴγυπτον) not as a geographical location but as surrender to idolatry (1.61).
27 Behind ἀφαιρεθήσεται stands the Hebrew סר, which is the standard word G translates as ἀφαιρέω, as already in 1:16, 25; 3:1, 18; 5:5; 6:7; 7:17; 10:13. But G also uses it for all of the following words, כאת כפר אסף אפס הדף חלף מחה נטה ספה עבר עטה ערב פתח צלח שבת שלח, indicating ἀφαιρέω is a favourite of his. See the note on G’s vocabulary in the Introduction. The order of the two phrases ὁ φόβος αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ σοῦ καὶ ὁ ζυγὸς αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὤμου σου is the same as in S and A (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); B transposes these two phrases. The yoke is to be destroyed (καταφθείρω) from the shoulder, using imagery that recalls 9:3, significant in the light of the recent recollection of Μαδιὰμ in 10:26.
28 The division between 10:28 and 29 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 29 after καὶ παρελεύσεται εἰς Μαγεδὼ καὶ ἐν Μαχμὰς θήσει τὰ σκεύη αὐτῶν·, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words.
30 Q reads Γαλλείμ ἐπακούσεται ἐν Σά (A and B have only one λ in Γαλείμ, and Rahlfs and Ziegler have Γαλλιμ, ἐπακούσεται Λαισα. Sinaiticus’ original reading Ταλείμ was changed by corrector ca to Γαλείμ.The future of ἐπακούω uses the middle form; the subject remains ἡ θυγάτηρ.
31 The division between 10:31 and 32 also differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 32 after παρακαλεῖτε, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before it. In G this word belongs with the words following, so my text division agrees with Swete and Ziegler here, against Rahlfs.
Encourage the daughter of Zion(10:32)[[@Bible:Isa 10:33-34]]
32 The phrase τοῦ μεῖναι is a wooden translation of לעמד, here acting as the complement of παρακαλεῖτε. The case of τὸ ὄρος could be either vocative or accusative. If vocative, it belongs with οἱ βουνοί; if accusative, in apposition to τὴν θυγατέρα. A first reading would not suggest the singular ὄρος as a vocative because the verb παρακαλεῖτε is plural. But by the end of the verse, the ὄρος makes sense as vocative when understood with βουνοί. Ottley has “Encourage her to day in the way to stay, encourage with the hand the hill, the daughter of Zion, and ye hills that are in Jerusalem.” Silva has “Encourage Sion today to remain in the way; O mount, as well as you hills that are in Ierousalem, with your hand encourage daughter Sion.”
33 All three instances of δεσπότης in G appear in the phrase ὁ δεσπότης Κύριος Σαβαώθ, as translations of האדון יהוה צבאות. In place of the present συντάσσει (from συντάσσω), Q’s corrector, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the present συνταράσσει (from συνταράσσω); S has the future συνταράξει. Because prepositional phrases normally modify verbs rather than nouns unless preceded by an article matching the noun, μετὰ ἰσχύος indicates that it is not those esteemed but the act of confounding that is “with strength.” 1 Clement 59:3 paraphrases 10:33 as τοὺς ὑψηλοὺς ταπεινοῦντα.
1 The prophecy regarding the root of Jesse (11:1-12:1) is one of the primary sources of messianic expectations in Early Judaism, although there is no mention of anointing here. The “root of Jesse” indicates this person is descended from David. God’s spirit resting on him indicates he will be inspired and wise. There is no mention of physical or military action; he will be a fair judge, using truthful words. He will reverse the fortunes of the humble and the esteemed. The result will be an end to agression and injury. The innocent will be safe; those they used to fear are now tame. The surprising reason for this transformation: everyone and everything knowing Lord. At that time, the one rises up to rule nations will provide hope. Judah and Ephraim will no longer be rivals, and they will be restored from the lands to which they had scattered. Their fortunes will likewise be restored, as they plunder those who had oppressed them, in what resembles a second Exodus. The prophecy as it appears in G presents the future Davidic figure metaphorically as a “rod,” ῥάβδος and a “flower,” ἄνθος. Although ῥάβδος can mean a disciplinarian’s rod (as in Exodus 21:20; Micah 4:14), or a shepherd’s staff (Psalm 23:4), in this context where the royal family is mentioned, the sceptre of authority is connoted (as in Psalm 44(45):7; 109(110):2). Although καί presents two metaphors, it can be inferred that these refer to a single person not only from the fact that they both come up from the root, but also that a singular verb is used in 11:2. The word for root, ῥίζα, appears again in 40:24, both translating גזע. As Sollamo noted (2006, 360), ῥίζα and ἄνθος both appeared together previously in Isa 5:22-24. There, the root and flower were compared to dust and chaff. Eusebius said the stump refers to the descendants of David, but Jesse is named rather than David because of Jesse’s decent lifestyle (1.62). Clement of Alexandria quoted 11:1 in Strom. 5.6, when he mentions “the seven spirits resting on the rod that springs from the root of Jesse.” Justin 1 Apol 32 mixed 11:1 and 10 with Numbers: Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον ἐξ Ἰακώβ, καὶ ἄνθος ἀναβήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς ῥίζης Ἰεσσαί• καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν βραχίονα αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. In Q, the final three letters of ἀναβήσεται are written below the rest of the word on their own line rather than at the beginning of the next page.
2 The spirit of God “rests,” ἀναπαύσεται. The preposition (only in S) provides more of a sense of stopping movement, rather than the sense of ἀναπαύω by itself, of stopping activity. 1 Pet 4:14 quotes similar words: τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πνεῦμα ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς ἀναπαύεται.
3 The neuter πνεῦμα is nominative rather than accusative because ἐμπίπλημι takes the container in the accusative case, and if the substance with which it is filled is specified, that substance appears not in the accusative but the genitive
case. But the parallel expressions πνεῦμα σοφίας καὶ συνέσεως, πνεῦμα βουλῆς καὶ ἰσχύος, and πνεῦμα γνώσεως καὶ εὐσεβείας (11:2) indicate that here again the genitive indicates what kind of spirit. So rather than “a spirit will fill him with fear of God,” which would be the natural reading of this clause on its own, the preferable reading in context is, “a spirit of the fear of God will fill him.” The difference is simply that he is full of a spirit, not full of a fear.
He will render justice(11:3-5)[[@Bible:Isa 11:1-5]]
3 The spirit filling him leads the figure to judge with respect to reality rather than to the surface appearance. Judging according to δόξα (“opinion”) would take the person’s appearance or reputation (the way they appear to others) into account. In a judicial context, judging according to λαλιά, “speech” would take their ability to speak well into account. Eusebius saw a connection between the filling here and the “fulness of deity” of Col 2:9. Other early Christian interpretation saw here the six (Gryson 1990) or seven (Schlütz 1932) gifts of the Holy Spirit.
4 Judging with κρίσις is a positive thing in this context; it requires discernment. Q and S differ from the other uncials in directing the judgement toward the esteemed ἐνδόξους rather than the humble ταπεινούς. Λόγος is an unexpected translation of שבט; LXX-D says this is an interpretation of the figurative meaning; a word is what comes out of mouths. An alternative but more far-fetched explanation is that שבט is phonetically similar to the construct of שָׂפָה, and שָׂפָה is translated λόγος in Pr 16:21. The πνεῦμα from 11:2-3 reappears, but this time because of the mention of mouth and lips, breath rather than spirit comes to mind. In the context of wind perhaps “carry away” would fit the meaning of ἀναιρέω. The earlier objects of destruction were masculine plural (people); here the ἀσεβῆ is either singular (an ungodly person) or neuter (ungodly things); Brenton and Ottley translated the masculine singular. Silva left it ambiguous (“the ungodly”), which misleadingly implies masculine plural to an English reader.
5 This future Davidic inspired judge will be equipped with righteousness and truth. These will be his tools. The accusative τὴν ὀσφύν (11:5) “the waist” is not the subject or object, but still limits the verb “girded,” ἐζωσμένος (perfect passive participle of ζώννυμι). Manuscripts Q, S, and A differ from B in reading εἰλημμένος, the perfect passive participle of λαμβάνω rather than B’s εἱλημένος from εἰλέω or εἴλω, “wrap,” which fits the parallelism and context better, and which Rahlfs, Ziegler recognized as the original reading.
6 The result of this truthful judging is that predators will coexist peacefully with their prey. Because Greek animal names are relatively uncommon to modern readers, I will simply note that πάρδαλις (11:6) is leopard (Panthera pardus/Felis pardus);ἐρίφῳ is a he-goat, μοσχάριον is the diminutive of μόσχος, a young bull, and ἄρκος is an alternate spelling of ἄρκτος, bear.
7 Carnivores will become herbivores, eating ἄχυρα, i.e., what is left over from threshing, “straw” or “chaff.”
8 The adjective νήπιον further diminuates what is already a diminuitive, παιδίον, emphasizing the innocence and powerlessness. Yet the innocent have nothing to fear from the formerly violent, represented by the notorious asp.
9 In parallel with the future indicative ἐπιβαλεῖ, Q’s first-hand, S, and B have κακοποιήσουσιν (11:9), in contrast to Q-corrector and A’s aorist subjunctive κακοποιήσωσιν, which fits better with οὐ μή and the parallel δύνωνται, and therefore is recognized by Rahlfs and Ziegler as the original reading. The conjunction ὅτι now provides the reason for this surprising future peaceful utopia: universal knowledge of the Lord. The reappearance of ἐμπίμπλημι recalls 11:3, where the spirit of the fear of God would fill (future, translating a weqatal). Here we have an aorist (translating a qatal), and the Hebrew roots differ. Because the active ἐμπίμπλημι takes an accusative to indicate the receptacle being filled, and a genitive to indicate the filling substance, with the passive ἐνεπλήσθη the receptacle is nominative ἡ σύμπασα, and what it is filled with is genitive τοῦ γνῶναι τὸν Κύριον “knowing the Lord.” An infinitive (κατακαλύψαι) is unexpected in this context but not unprecedented in the OG (Ezek 22:32; Num 23:19). Although Silva reads it as an infinitive “like much water to cover seas,” Brenton and Ottley take it not as an infinitive but as an optative in a comparative clause: “as much water covereth seas,” citing in support the clear optative in Isa 21:1. Manuscript V has a future here, as does Hab 2:14. The parallel between γνῶναι and κατακαλύψαι is somewhat weakened by the absence of τοῦ before κατακαλύψαι. Eusebius claimed the “whole earth” indicates the spread of the Church of God, which preaches righteous knowledge, whose floods cleanse the soul of all sordidness (1.62). The meaning is clear enough, even if the grammar is puzzling: the reason for the future peace is universal knowledge of the Lord.
10 The future peace coincides with one rising up to rule nations. It is unclear at first glance whether this person “rising up to rule nations” is the same or a different person as the aforementioned root. The καί (11:10) could indicate two distinct leaders, the “root” and the ruler, in what would be a dual-leadership role. But the singular verb ἔσται points to a single person, in which case the καί is epexegetical, describing another role of the same person. To confirm this
interpretation, the following clause, ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν indicates they are the same. Eusebius certainly considered one person to be in view here, and the rising indicates the resurrection from the dead (1.62). The mention of ἀνάπαυσις recalls the ἀναπαύσεται of 11:2, where the spirit of God would rest on the rod from the root of Jesse. Eusebius identified this “rest” with the Savior’s death, in which he was glorified (John 17:15). Isa 11:10 is commonly quoted in early Christian writings, probably because Paul quoted it verbatim in Rom 15:12: καὶ πάλιν Ἠσαΐας λέγει· Ἔσται ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν· ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. As mentioned at 11:1, Justin Martyr mixed 11:1 and 10 with Numbers. Cyprian quoted 11:10 in Test. 1.21. Novatian Trinity 9 quoted it to show Jesus would rise from the dead. Lactantius Inst. 4.13 quoted it to show Christ would be born according to the flesh, from the house of David. Apostolic Constitutions 5.20 quotes it to prove that the Gentiles would believe.
11 Those of God’s people who remain will return from all the countries where they have been scattered. The phrase ὃ ἂν καταλειφθῇ is neuter to match τὸ καταλειφθὲν. I therefore have translated both as “remnant” even though the two differ grammatically; the first is a participle, and the second is a relative clause. ὃ is not the masculine article, but the neuter relative pronoun, referring back to τὸ καταλειφθὲν.
12 The remnant are gathered from the four “wings,” πτέρυξ, a literal translation of the Hebrew כנף. Irenaeus alluded to 11:12 in Haer. 4.33.1, with the words, “He gathered from the ends of the earth into His Father’s fold the children who were scattered abroad.” The allusion is not precise, but because he quoted 11:4 in the same sentence, it is probable that he had this passage in mind.
Peace between Ephraim and Judah(11:13)[[@Bible:Isa 11:10-14]]
13 The practice of literal translation continues with ὁ ζῆλος Ἐφράιμ from the corresponding Hebrew קנאת אפרים. This ζῆλος is picked up later in the same verse with ζηλώσει, but because this second instance is in parallel with θλίψει, it is hostile. Ephraim and Judah are presented as the two parts of the remnant (Ephraim and Israel refer to the same people). The prophecy foresees peace between the two, and peace from their enemies, who will be destroyed.
Lord will desolate the sea of Egypt(11:14-12:2)[[@Bible:Isa 11:10-14]]
14 The reversal of fortunes enables Judah and Israel to travel the sea and gain from its riches, and reverse their relationship with Moab and Ammon. Although the form πετασθήσονται in 11:14 is from πετάζω, which is listed under πεταννύω “spread out” in LSJ, as Ottley noted, this must be the future passive of πέτομαι “fly,” as in Hab 1:8; 2 Samuel 22:11; Ps 17(18):10; 54(55):7. ἀλλοφύλων translates פלשׁתים, as usual; however in 9:12 פלשׁתים became Ἕλληνας. The accusative θάλασσαν does not fit with the intransitive verb πετασθήσονται, so it belongs with the upcoming verb προνομεύσουσιν. The rising of the sun indicates the East, the direction of Edom. Hippolytus, Comm. Dan. 2.40 quoted 11:14 to show that Moab and Ammon are sons of Esau. Again in Antichr. 51, he quoted: “And they shall fly in the boats of strangers, plundering the sea together, and (they shall spoil) them of the east: and they shall lay hands upon Moab first; and the children of Ammon shall first obey them.”
15 The prophecy continues the reversal of fortunes, now switching from Israel and Judah to Lord as the agent. Previously, the violence may have been read implicity against Edom, Moab, and Ammon, but now it is explicit, with desolation, striking, and a violent wind. The phrase ἐπιβαλεῖ τὴν χεῖρα links the behaviour of the human and divine agents, which had been described with the words ἐπιβαλοῦσιν τὰς χεῖρας in 11:14, as well as 11:8. The reappearance of πνεύματι recalls 11:2-4, and πατάξει recalls the phrase πατάξει γῆν from 11:4. Even ὑποδήμασιν “sandals” is brought back as a symbol of force, just as it was in 5:27.
16 Just as the ten plagues struck Egypt, Lord will again strike Egypt. Just as there was passage for Israel through the sea then, there will be a δίοδος, a way through, for the remnant again. Although to this point Lord had been spoken of in the third person, now a first person pronoun appears in “my people.” Arie van der Kooij argued that Greek Isa 11:11-16 and 49:5-6 (in contrast to the Hebrew) distinguish two groups in exile: (a) the people of Israel, and (b) a particular
group of Jews. G presents the Servant in exile who “shall be gathered” (49:5) as “my people in Egypt” in 11:16. The Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16; 19:25. Van der Kooij therefore suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” in Isa 42:1 refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394). In van der Kooij’s view, this group is the followers of Onias IV in Egypt (1997b, 395).
1 G keeps Isa 12:1 together with what precedes, which is reasonable given the linking phrase “on that day,” except that it involves another change of person from third person verb endings, this time to the second person. The addressee is singular, one who will praise Lord on the day of the new exodus. Eusebius understood this to be Egypt, which at his time had largely converted to Christianity and therefore were praising the Christ of God (1.64). Εὐλογήσῶ translates a yiqtol verb; in Q, A, and S corrector cb2 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), it is a future tense. In S* and B, it is a present (εὐλογω).
2 The individual’s (first person singular) praise continues, with multiple references to Lord’s salvation (σωτήρ, σωθήσομαι, σωτηρίαν), and the resulting confidence this inspires. The clause ὁ θεός μου σωτήρ μου κύριος (in Q and S, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has three nouns in the nominative case, but no third person verb, so one of them is a predicate nominative, and another is in apposition. The most definite (ὁ θεός μου) should be taken as the subject, the least definite (σωτήρ μου) as the predicate nominative. The name κύριος, being definite, is then in apposition to the subject, “Lord my god is my Savior.” Other manuscripts do not have κύριος here, thereby avoiding this grammatical difficulty. The resulting state for the individual is πεποιθώς, the same form that appeared in earlier in 8:14 and 8:17. Heb 2:13 quotes ἐγὼ ἔσομαι πεποιθὼς ἐπʼ αὐτῷ verbatim. Eusebius saw this fulfilled in his day, in that Egypt was no longer afraid to serve God according to the word of Christ (1.64). The two nominatives δόξα and αἴνεσις both serve the same function and are definite. Κύριος, a proper name, is also definite, so it is ambiguous which is the subject and which the predicate, i.e., whether “My glory and my praise is Lord.” Eusebius read it as I have translated, with glory and praise as predicate nominatives (1.64).
3 The theme of salvation continues with a metaphor; salvation will be as abundant as water in a stream. But the verb ending has shifted back to second person, as in the beginning of 12:1, except that now it is plural. Brenton translated ἀντλήσετε (12:3), the future of ἀντλέω, as an imperative. ἀντλέω refers to taking liquid (here ὕδωρ) from out of something, here the πηγῶν (following Q’s corrector), which refer to an abundant water source. Q’s first-hand reading πληγῶν is likely nothing more than a minor scribal error; however, before the correction, it could be understood as a reference to the servant of chapter 53 (he is ἄνθρωπος ἐν πληγῇ who carries sins and endures pain in 53:3-5). Eusebius allegorized this spring of salvation as the words of the gospel that pour from the Holy Spirit (1.64).
4 The verb ending now changes back to singular ἐρεῖς (12:4), as the person the prophet is addressing (which according to Eusebius is the preacher of the gospel) is foretold to exhort another group (the Egyptians, according to Eusebius) to praise God. The quoted words use second person plural imperatives. ὑμνέω with an accusative of the person sung of means to celebrate or commemorate that person in a hymn; i.e., to sing in praise to or of that person. The parallel verb, βοάω, with an accusative of a thing normally means to use a loud voice to call for or celebrate that thing. A second pair of parallel exhortations begins with ἀναγγείλατε; ἀναγγέλλω normally means report or proclaim.
5 The repeated verb ἀναγγείλατε in 12:5 connects this verse to the preceding. Similarly, in 12:4 twice Lord’s “name” was the object of praise, as it is again here. In fact, Isa 12:5 and 6 are an expansion of 12:4.
6 ἀγαλλιάω implies an extreme degree of rejoicing, and the sound of ἀγαλλιάσθε resembles ἀναγγείλατε from the preceding verses. ὑψώθη ties 12:6 with 12:4 (where Lord’s name was exalted) and ὑψηλὰ in 12:5 (where his deeds were exalted). Finally, the prophecy ends with a return to the singular pronoun σου, although the second person verbs here have all been plural.
1 The entirety of Isaiah 13:1 is indented within the column of Marchalianus. The introduction of this “vision” is comparable to that of Isaiah 1:1, which read Ὅρασις, ἣν εἶδεν Ἠσαίας υἱὸς Ἀμώς, ἣν εἶδεν κατὰ τῆς Ἰουδαίας, καὶ κατὰ Ἰερουσαλήμ ἐν βασιλείᾳ Ὀζίου, καὶ Ἰωαθὰμ, καὶ Ἀχὰζ καὶ Ἑζεκίου. In comparison with chapter 1, the introduction here has no time reference. Chapters 15 and 17 begin similarly, and are directed against Moab and Damascus. Eusebius saw the vision against Babylon as the first in a series of ten prophecies against the nations of the world: against Babylon (13:1-14:27) Palestinians (14:28-32), Moab (15-16), Damascus (17-18), Egypt (19-20), “the wilderness” (21:1-10), Edom (21:11-12), Arabia (21:13-21), “the ravine of Zion” (i.e., the Jews, 22), and Tyre (23). The direction is clearly shifted away from Isaiah’s own people, but not in a simple geographical widening of scope, since the first, Babylon is the most distant of these three adversaries. The “vision” against Babylon (13:1-14), which Eusebius called the largest city of the Assyrians (1.65), describes a near future of wrath called “the day of Lord” (13:2-16). The Medes will leave Babylon desolate (13:17-22). Lord will reverse the fortunes of Israel (14:1-3) and Babylon (14:4-23). The Assyrians will be expelled from Israel (14:24-27), and trouble is on its way for foreigners (14:28-32). Eusebius separated this last “theme” against the “Philistines” from the “theme” against the Babylonians (1.65).
2 The announcement of Lord Sabaoth’s coming wrath in 13:2 is presented in vivid imagery, full of sights and sounds. It begins with a series of imperatives, leaving the reader wondering who is being addressed. The command is to raise a visible sign on ὄρους πεδινοῦ. This is not a pair of two nouns (a mountain of a plain), which would be ὄρους πεδίου. Rather, this noun modified by an adjective could mean a flat or low mountain (Johan Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie 2008), or a mountain found on a plain (Silva 2007). πεδινός stands in antithetical parallelism with a forest in 32:19. Seeligmann suggested the word πεδινός was chosen because of the Aramaic root שפ”י “to be smooth” (compare Numbers 23:3) (1948, 50). The second imperative to raise their own voice still does not identify any addressees: who is being commanded to raise others’ voices. Since the command is to be comforted by the hand, presumably a comforting hand gesture is intended. With οἱ ἄρχοντες, an addressee is finally specified, but again it is not clear whether they are the addressees of ἄρατε and ὑψώσατε, or those referred to by ἑαυτῶν. I avoid “leaders” as a translation of ἄρχοντες because in the next verse I use “lead” for a different Greek word, ἄγω. Eusebius said that after this teaching directed generally to all arrogant rulers, he then focussed in on Babylon specifically (1.65).
3 To compound the ambiguity of the participants in this speech, in 13:3 now the speaker appears via first person pronouns. The reading of Q and S is followed
by Rahlfs: ἐγὼ ἄγω αὐτούς· ἡγιασμένοι εἰσίν, καὶ ἐγὼ ἄγω. In Vaticanus and Alexandrinus scribes skipped some words between the two instances of ἐγώ. Ziegler departed from Rahlfs’s reading with his ἁγιάζω αὐτούς· [ἡγιασμένοι εἰσί] καὶ ἐγὼ καλῶ. Ziegler’s ἁγιάζω and καλῶ are conjecture; the latter has support only in Tyconius (voco). At this point, because they are appointed, the referent of αὐτούς would seem to be the ἄρχοντες. Yet the speaker has still not been explicitly identified, though the fact that he must be someone in authority to make appointments implies that he is Lord. This inference is strengthed by the phrase πληρῶσαι τὸν θυμόν μου because the wrath mentioned so far in G has been Lord’s. Those who are fulfilling Lord’s wrath are called “giants,” whom Eusebius identified as either the personification of political powers, or the offspring of fallen angels (Gen 6:4; Baruch 3:26). Readers might revise their identification of those who Lord claims to appoint and lead. The identification between the referents of αὐτούς in this verse and οἱ ἄρχοντες of 13:2 is weakened in the reader’s mind. In G ὑβρίζω denotes a wicked attitude, so the reader becomes reluctant to believe the giants are Lord’s servants. The reader might imagine two groups: the sanctified rulers (appointed and led by the speaker), and the giants, fulfilling the speaker’s wrath.
4 The verbless clause φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν φωνὴ βασιλέων καὶ ἐθνῶν συνηγμένων (13:4) could be understood as an exclamation, with the two nominatives in apposition. This is how Eusebius evidently read it (he said nothing but the kings’ voices will escape, 1.65), and Silva too adopted this second interpretation: “A voice of many nations on the mountains like that of many nations!” (2007). Although the identity is not stated and different verbs are used in ἐντέταλται ἔθνει ὁπλομάχῳ, the fact that Lord appointed them gives the reader to this point the impression that this heavily-armed nation is the aforementioned “giants.”
5 These heavily armed men of Lord come from ἄκρου θεμελίου τοῦ οὐρανοῦ (13:5), where Eusebius said those awaiting the final judgement are imprisoned (1.65). These are the points where the dome of the sky rests on the earth. By this point, since the victims of the nation of armed giants are the whole world (not some sanctified rulers), this nation is identified with the rulers; their “sanctification” must therefore be a commissioning, setting them apart for this task.
6 The prophecy continues with a warning that the day of Lord is near, and this will not be a pleasant thing. It is characterized by crushing, weariness, and fear. See the note on ὀλολύζετε in 10:10, where an aorist of the same imperative appeared. Although the spelling of the original scribe of Q is ὀλολύζεται (indicative singular), the form should be plural to match the nominative ἄρχοντες of verse 2. ὀλολύζεται is a spelling variation of the plural imperative ὀλολύζετε, which is what Q’s corrector wrote, matching S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). That the day of the Lord is one decisive day is indicated by the article. The crushing from God is in parallel to the day of Lord, which makes it clear that this day is not of peace, but of violence.
7 The crushing from God results in weariness and fear. Although the verb ἐκλύω(13:7) normally means “set free” (LSJ), in early Christian literature (BDAG), the passive has the sense of “become weary, give out,” which fits this context better, including δειλιάω “be afraid.”
8 The fear is depicted in several images: old men (πρέσβεις, 13:8) are troubled (ταράσσω, 13:8) with pangs, they wail, and their face changes. The pangs are in the nominative case, ὠδῖνες αὐτοὺς ἕξουσιν, so the subject is the pangs; the old men are the object. συμφοράζω is a rare word, meaning bewail (LSJ; GELS). G translates ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον idiomatically from אישׁ אל רעהו, which would more literally be “man to his companion.” ἐξίστημι is prototypically “change,” often in the sense of being out of one’s mind with amazement, which is the sense of the Hebrew יתמהו. But here, in parallel with μεταβαλοῦσιν (it seems G thought “faces” was from the Hebrew verb פנה, which can mean “change”), simple “change” may have been understood by the reader. Eusebius said their faces will change colour as a result of their perplexity (1.65).
9 The description of the day of the Lord continues, now with an image of celestial darkness. In 13:6, the reading ἡἡμέραwas in Q, S, and A but B had only ἡμέρα without the article. This time, though, Rahlfs and Ziegler follow the reading of B rather than S and A because Codex Marchalianus (Q) is anarthrous. The coming day is ἀνίατος from ἰάομαι, meaning incurable. The syntactic relationship of θυμοῦ καὶ ὀργῆς is unclear. Brenton supplies a noun, “the day of the Lord is coming which cannot be escaped, a day of wrath and anger” (Brenton 1870), followed by Silva’s “the incurable day of the Lord comes, a day of wrath and
anger” (Silva 2007). Ottley treated these as modifiers of ἀνίατος: “the day of the Lord cometh, and there is no healing of its wrath and anger” (Ottley 1904). Usually ἰάομαι uses not simply a genitive but the preposition ἀπό to indicate the ailment from which the person is healed (BDAG), although Muraoka did present this possibility for ἀνίατος (Muraoka 1993). ἀνίατος cannot be a predicate nominative, “the day of Lord is incurable” because that would leave ἔρχεται alone in a clause with genitive modifiers θυμοῦ καὶ ὀργῆς. More naturally, ἔρχεται has as complement the aorist infinitive of τίθημι (which literally translates לשׂום). The day of Lord is to bring desolation to the whole world; the phrase τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην links this verse to 13:5, where Lord and his heavily armed nation come to spoil it. Sinners will be destroyed from “it” ἐξ αὐτῆς, that is, from the inhabited world. Irenaeus in Haer. 5.35.1 quoted 13:9 to show that the end times prophecies cannot be allegorized; they will occur after the coming of Antichrist.
10 Not only is the earth desolated, even the celestial bodies are affected. The stars, sun, and moon are all darkened. Because ἀνατέλλοντος has no article, this is not an attributive use of the genitive participle, but a circumstantial use of the genitive absolute: when the sun rises, the light will be dark. It is this imagery that Jesus uses in Mark 13:24 (see also Matt 24:29) to describe the eschaton. Clement of Alexandria (Exhortation 8) quoted 13:10 to show how thorough the judgement will be.
11 The paragraph ends with a series of first-person verbs: I will appoint (ἐντέλλω or ἐντελέω), destroy (ἀπόλλυμι), and bring down (ταπεινόω). If ἐντελοῦμαι is the future of ἐντέλλω (as in Matt 4:6; Luke 4:10), it recalls 13:4, where Lord had appointed or commanded (ἐντέταλται) an army. Here, however, the accusative objects are bad things and sins, and the dative objects are the world and the impious. Usually when ἐντέλλω has both accusative and dative modifiers, the action commanded is in the accusative, and the person commanded to do that action is in the dative. If we have such a construction here, the people would be commanded to do bad things and sins. The alternative possibility, that ἐντελοῦμαι is the present of ἐντελέω, “complete,” would probably not occur immediately to a reader because it is a rare word. The difficulty stems from G’s choice of ἐντέλλω to render פקד in the Hebrew phrase ופקדתי על תבל רעה ועל רשׁעים עונם. This is a reasonable equivalent, if the sense is “appoint.” As Eusebius wrote, “the ungodly were delivered over to suffer” (1.65). 1 Clement 59.3 alludes to 13:11 that God lays low the insolence of the haughty, by quoting ταπεινοῦντα ὕβριν ὑπερηφάνων.
12 The crushing of the day of Lord is so extensive that it results in depopulation. Humans will be rare because the created order will have become inhospitable. Usually when used in reference to people, ἔντιμοι would mean honoured, but when comparing humans to precious metals and stones, “valued” is preferable as an English translation. The gold is ἄπυρον, literally “unfired,” so gold nuggets are in view. The Hebrew place name translated Σουφείρ is אופיר, Ophir, which is spelled with the Σ also in 3 Kgdms 9:28; 10:11; 1 Ch 29:4; 2 Ch 8:18; 9:10. Ottley pointed out that the added Σ is not unprecedented in Greek transliterations of proper names, since B reads Num 34:20 Σεμιούδ and Num 34:23 Σουφί for עַמִּיהוּד and אֵפֹד respectively.
13 Lord’s anger is introduced by the verb θυμωθήσεται (future passive of θυμόω). Q is unique in reading θυμὸν in place of the phrase θυμὸν ὀργῆς, which subsequently intensifies the wrath; when these two nouns are together in a genitive relationship, LEH suggests “fierce anger” (2003, s.v. θυμός).
14 The scarcity of humans in the land does not make them safe. Even those who remain will be subject to capture, defeat, plunder, and rape (13:14-16). The first sentence (13:14) in this paragraph indicates they will be disorganized, fending for themselves. The result is that they will be turned back, ἀποστραφῆναι, the aorist passive infinitive of ἀποστρέφω. The passive form can be used in a middle sense, as in Acts 7:39 “they turned back to Egypt.”
15 Those who were unsuccessful in their retreat to their own land will be captured (ἁλίσκομαι, 13:15) and defeated (ἡττάομαι, prototypically “being inferior”). Those who try to organize themselves (perfect participle of συνάγω) will be executed
by the sword. Instead of ἐάν (the reading also of A and followed by Ziegler), Rahlfs has ἂν (the reading of S and B). In 13:13, Ziegler had the reverse: ἂν where S had ἐὰν. In both cases, Ziegler followed Q and A.
16 Whereas the men are victims of the sword, the children are victims of being dashed, the houses of plunder, and the women of rape (13:16). The verb προνομεύω reappears from 10:13 and 11:14. I take τὰς γυναῖκας αὐτῶν ἕξουσιν in this context as an act of personal violence parallel to plunder and death.
17 The prophecy now returns to speaking in the first-person, last seen in 13:11. Presumably, it is still Lord Sabaoth speaking (although Lord has been mentioned in the third person in 13:13), and he is still addressing the rulers. Here Lord introduces the Medes, who Eusebius identified as those who replaced the Assyrians, and were themselves subsequently replaced by the Persians (1.67). Lord claims to be raising the Medes against the addressees. Usually ἐπεγείρω (13:17) takes the person or thing being stirred up in the accusative case, and the person against which it is stirred up is in a prepositional phrase, with ἐπί or κατά or εἰς. Here we have the accusative, but with a dative case as well, serving the same function as the prepositional phrase. The fact that they need no money indicates their prior wealth.
18 The claim that the Medes will shatter (συντρίβω) the τοξεύματα “arrows” (13:18) means weapons can have no effect on the Medes. Standard English does not allow the distinction between the two kinds of “your” in the Greek. The first mention of “your” children is plural; the second is singular. For the second instance, instead of the reading of Q, σου, which is also in S, A, and B, Rahlfs conjectured οὐ, and Ziegler followed, supported by the Latin of Tyconius (non). The singular σου is certainly out of place in the context of the two preceding plural second person pronouns, but such switches of number are not uncommon in G. Whether the reading is σου or οὐ, the the negation of φείδομαι (which generally means by inaction stopping something, usually bad) is already conveyed by οὐδέ.
The first device is a simile using ὃν τρόπον. The syntax is awkward, but the sense is clear enough: Babylon will experience the same fate as Sodom and Gomorra: catastrophe.
20 The catastrophe is of such an extent that people will not even visit it ever again. The Hebrew word behind τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον is נצח, not the usual one for eternity, but it is rendered this same way in 33:20, and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα in 28:28. Three clauses follow, each with οὐδέ and a subsequent negation (οὐ, μή, or both). The original reading of the first two is disputed. In the first instance, Q and S both read οὐδ’ οὐ μὴ but A, B, Rahlfs & Ziegler have οὐδὲ μὴ. In the second clause, Q agrees with A, B, Rahlfs & Ziegler in reading οὐδὲ μὴ while S is repeats οὐδ’ οὐ μὴ; but the last of the three parallel clauses certainly has both οὐδὲ and οὐ μὴ. The subject of the first εἰσέλθωσιν is not specified; it could be indefinite or the Arabs, because they are the subject of the next verb. Not even Arabs or shepherds go there. Instead of the future indicative ἀναπαύσονται (shared with S and B and adopted by Ziegler), A has the aorist subjunctive ἀναπαύσωνται (followed by Rahlfs), which fits the other parallel verbs better.
Babylon will be populated by spirits and beasts(13:21-22)[[@Bible:Isa 13:19-22]]
21 Instead of human visitors, Babylon will be the haunt of wild creatures. Instead of shepherds, wild animals and Sirens will rest (ἀναπαύσονται). The houses will be filled (ἐμπλησθήσονται, future passive of ἐμπίπλημι) with ἤχου, sound, in this context of animals, probably “noise” is a better translation, to indicate the chaos that results from the absence of humans. A Σειρήν was a woman or winged creature whose song lured sailors to the rocks (e.g., Odyssey 12.39). The Hebrew here is בנות יענה, ostrich daughters. In Micah 1:8, the ostriches are known for their “mourning;” there the Greek word Σειρήν is also used, as also in Jer 27:39. The Hebrew word appears in Isaiah also in 34:13 and 43:20, and in the Pentateuch in Lev 11:16 and Deut 14:15, all rendered with στρουθός, which means sparrow or ostrich. The Hebrew behind δαιμόνια is שׂעירים “goats,” which appears dozens of times in Leviticus and Numbers as χίμαρος. G never renders it as χίμαρος; in its other appearance in 34:14, it becomes ἕτερος, but δαιμόνια does appear earlier in that verse, translating צִיִּים. These divine beings dance there, using the same verb (ὀρχέομαι) as in Matt 14:6 and Mark 6:22.
22 The other two wild creatures to settle where Babylon used to be are the ὀνοκένταυροι and ἐχῖνοι. ὀνοκένταυρος, literally “donkey-centaur,” is defined by LSJ as “a kind of tailless ape,” citing Claudius Aelianus, De natura animalum 17.9, which describes a creature resembling an orangutan except for grey color; so Gossen suggested a gorilla (1935, sec. 241), and Scholfield a chimpanzee (Aelian 1958, 3:333): Ὀνοκενταύραν καλοῦσι ζῷόν τι, … ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ πρόσωπον εἴκασται, περιέρχονται δὲ αὐτὸ βαθεῖαι τρίχες. Since this is a word otherwise unattested in Greek before the 3rd century (it also appears in 34:14), it is presumably rare, and the reader of G would probably discern its meaning solely by etymology, “donkey-centaur.” The Hebrew is איים, which is also the word for island, and is rendered ὀνοκένταυρος again in 34:14; Q contains a marginal note at 34:14 with the readings of Aquila and Symmachus, which use Λιλιθ and Λάμιᾰ respectively in place of ὀνοκένταυροι. The fact that ἐχῖνοι (which LSJ identifies as the hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus) would make their nests (νοσσοποιήσουσιν) there indicates the dearth of humans in what used to be the great city Babylon. This prophecy refers not to the distant future; it is imminent. 1 Clement 23.5 quotes from 13:22 with the words ταχὐ ἤξει καὶ οὐ χρονιεῖ, to make his point that the end is coming soon.
1 Corresponding to Babylon’s reversal of fortune is Israel’s converse reversal from captivity to domination (14:1-2). Israel is called τὸν Ἰακώβ; the article on this proper name serves to indicate the direct object, and corresponds to the Hebrew definite direct object marker. Of the 40 times Jacob appears in G, 4 have the genitive article, and three have the accusative article. Never is the nominative or dative article used with Jacob in G. In the rest of the OG, the dative article is used with Jacob (more than the accusative and genitive combined), but never the nominative. The definite direct object marker אֵת gets omitted in translation before proper names in 7:12, 13; 8:13; 62:6, 9 (Lord); 11:3 (Judah); 11:13 (Ephraim); 13:19 (Sodom, Gomorra); 19:4, 13, 14 (Egypt); 20:4 (Ethiopia); 23:17 (Tyre); 36:2 (Rapsakes); 36:19 (Samaria); 36:20; 62:7; 65:18 (Jerusalem); 37:2 (Somnas, Eliakim); 37:12 (Charran). The definite direct object marker becomes the Greek article before proper names in 1:4; 6:1; 9:12; 11:9; 19:21 (Lord); 8:2 (Urias, Zacharias); 8:6 (Raasson); 9:11 (Israel); 9:20 (Manasseh); 13:17 (Medes); 14:1 (Jacob); 19:22 (Egypt). It is noteworthy that after chapter 19, the definite direct object marker never becomes the Greek article before proper names. The prophecy has Lord showing pity or mercy and “choosing” Jacob/Israel. The parallel between ἐλεήσει and ἐκλέξεται (a literal translation of בחר), is not semantic, but there is some similarity in sound. Their “rest” ἀναπαύσονται in the land recalls 13:20-21. The person added to their number is given as
γειώρας, a transliteration of גר, which would likely not be a familiar word to a Greek reader. Besides this occurence, Josephus also used the word as the surname of Simon (J.W. 2.652; 4.503; 5.11; 6.114; 7.25, 154, 265). Theodoret of Cyr (in Isaiam 5.208) explains that this is a proselyte (Γιώρας τῇ Ἑλλάδι φωνῇ ὁ προσήλυτος ἑρμηνεύεται), which is the word Eusebius indicates the other translators used. He describes such proselytes in words that sound like he means immigrants who adopt a host culture as their own: προσηλύτους τε αὐτῶν γενέσθαι καὶ προστεθῆναι τῷ οἴκῳ Ἰακὼβ οὐκ ὄντας μὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν, διὰ δὲ τὸ προσηλυτεῦσαι οἰκειουμένους αὐτοῖς ὡς μηδὲν διαφέρειν τῶν ἐγγενῶν καὶ ἀλλοφύλων (1.68). The two instances of προστεθήσεται each translate a different Hebrew word: first ונלוה then ונספחו. Both mean “be joined.” The resulting Greek sounds redundant rather than poetic.
2 Eusebius saw the fulfilment of the prophecy that nations would lead the house (singular) of Israel into their (plural) place in Cyrus’ edict, quoting Ezra 1:5-6. The reversal of the captives and dominators was fulfilled when the Persians and Medes defeated the Assyrians/Babylonians (1.68). As they increase in the land, they will become bondservants (εἰς δούλους καὶ δούλας). The preposition εἰς seems out of place here, but it is a literal translation of לעבדים ולשׁפחות. Ziegler listed Q’s first-hand reading as κυριευθήσεται, but Swete as κυριευθήσοται. The disputed character was an epsilon which was transformed into an omicron; a nu was then superscripted between the omicron and tau (κυριευθήσονται) to match the reading of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
3 The restoration of Israel relieves them from their former suffering, which is now transferred to their former oppressors (14:3-4). In chapter 13, “that day” was a day of violence. Now (14:3), “that day” will bring rest, at least for Israel. The singular addressee implied by σε is not specified, but the context suggests it refers to the οἶκος Ἰσραήλ from 14:2. The verb for rest, ἀναπαύσει has three genitives: pain, temper, and servitude. Pain and servitude have parallel meanings, but θυμοῦ σου does not match the other two semantically. The pain and servitude are things God might stop his people from experiencing, and even wrath might fit, if it were God’s wrath. But it is the people’s θυμός. The possessive pronoun σου could modify ὀδύνης rather than θυμοῦ, but this possibility, attractive in both Marchalianus and Vaticanus, is weakened by the presence of the conjunction καί in S and A. The relative pronoun ἧς is genitive by attraction to δουλείας … σκληρᾶς; more properly it should be accusative or dative in the relative clause.
4 The singular addressee, the house of Israel, is to take up a θρῆνον, an expression of grief, over the king of Babylon. Robert Gordon identified various ancient near eastern stories of divine beings challenging their superiors and receiving punishment, and extended this theme to humans who likewise overstep their bounds by their aspirations to divinity. In addition to the Isaianic instances in Isaiah 14:3-23; 36-37; 26:13-15, biblical texts also include Psalm 82; Ezekiel 28, Genesis 6:1-4; 2-3, as well as the Gilgamesh Epic (R. P. Gordon 2010). A rhetorical question (πῶς normally introduces a question) celebrates the abrupt cessation of oppression. The active of ἀναπαύω in 14:3 meant to give rest; here the middle means to take rest, as those in Rev 14:13 retire (ἀναπαήσονται) from their labours. G manages to include alliteration in Πῶς ἀναπέπαυται ὁ ἀπαιτῶν καὶ ἀναπέπαυται ὁ ἐπισπουδαστής. Silva has “taskmaster” for the rare word ἐπισπουδαστής. The meaning of the MT מדהבה is uncertain: insolence, fury, hostility, and even golden city have been suggested. The opinion of most moderns is expressed by Wildberger: “מדהבה can hardly be the correct reading … the hiphʿil מַרְהִיב (tyrant, stormer) (or, if need be, the piʿel מְרַהֵב, ‘tyrant, stormer’) should be read here” (1997, 41). 1QIsaa confirms the reading מרהבה. Perhaps G had in mind the root מהר when he rendered it ἐπισπουδαστής.
5 The taskmaster has stopped because God has crushed (συντρίβω) the yoke of the sinners and rulers (14:5). These two objects of crushing are in synonymous parallelism, recalling the beginning of chapter 13 (13:2, 9).
6 The way God has crushed this yoke is expressed with the masculine nominative participle πατάξας, modifying ὁ θεός; the object of πατάξας is the neuter accusative ἔθνος. Both θυμῷ and πληγῇ are dative, but θυμῷ indicates the attitude of God, whereas πληγῇ indicates the means by which the striking happens. The blow with which he strikes is ἀνίατος, recalling the incurable blow of 13:9. παίω normally means to hit bodily; it takes an accusative to indicate the person receiving the blow. Here we have two accusatives, the other being πληγήν. In such cases the second accusative indicates the instrument, as in Aeschylus, Persians 408–409 ναῦς ἐν νηὶ χαλκήρη στόλον ἔπαισεν. Again, the blow (indicated by the feminine ἣ; it does not have God as referent) is unsparing; φείδομαι recalls 13:18. The phrase πατάξας ἔθνος θυμῷ πληγῇ ἀνιάτῳ is used by 2 Macc 9:5 ἐπάταξεν
αὐτὸν ἀνιάτῳ καὶ ἀοράτῳ πληγῇ with θυμῷ and θεός (from 14:5) in close proximity. Rahlfs divides 14:6 from 14:7 before ἀνεπαύσατο πεποιθώς; Swete and Ziegler do so after. In Q, the gap is slightly larger after these words than before, so my transcription follows Swete and Ziegler rather than Rahlfs here.
The appearance of ἀναπαύω again recalls 13:20, 21 and 14:1. No new subject has been introduced, so the one resting would seem to be God. The problem is that πεποιθώς is usually a word applied to humans rather than God (see the note on 12:2). Here it translates שׁקט “keep quiet.”
The land and trees rejoiced(14:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
8 The second person pronouns raise the question of the identity of the addressee. Eusebius said the trees were to rejoice over the fall of the absolute rulers, and falling asleep refers to death. Ἀφ οὗ σὺ κεκοίμησαι is a literal translation of מאז שׁכבת, “from (the time) when you have fallen asleep.” The perfect tense is unusual in G (except for the perfect of πείθω and καταλείπω); it is used 71 times for a qatal verb. Alexandrinus has κόπων from κοπόω, “exhaust,” but κόπτων, “one who chops” better fits the context of trees, and matches the Hebrew כרת, “cut.” Eusebius identified the “us” as those on the earth and those who have died and are in Hades.
Counted among the giant kings91
9 The name ᾅδης properly refers to the god of the underworld (hence κάτωθεν), death personified, but Eusebius treated Hades as a place (1.68). Eusebius interpreted the embittering (πικραίνω) of Hades as its anger and wrath, when it rises up (συναντήσας, a circumstantial participle modifying ἐπικράνθη) against the king of Babylon. The dative “you” in the phrase συνηγέρθησάν σοι would normally be understood as “with you” when with συνεγείρω, but BDAG offers “all rise up together for you” for Isa 14:9. The mention of giants and rulers (γίγαντες … ἄρξαντες) recalls the Babylonians from 13:2-3, and 14:5. For πάντες (the reading of Q and S), the other manuscripts (A and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read πάντας; this would make the kings (βασιλεῖς can be nominative or accusative; see 14:16) the direct objects of ἐγείραντες. The reading in Q and S yields an abundance of nominatives in 14:9: Hades with its singular verb ἐπικράνθη, and the giants and kings, with their plural verb συνηγέρθησαν.
10 The giant kings tell the king of Babylon that his fate is now the same as theirs. The ἑάλως (aorist indicative second person singular of ἁλίσκομαι) “you were taken” recalls 13:15. Here it translates חלה “be weak.” The king of Babylon is “reckoned” among the giants and kings; καταλογίζομαι appears only here in G, although it also appears in Wis 5:5.
11 The giant kings taunt the king of Babylon that his happiness is over; his buried body will be surrounded by decay and worms. Because Hades is the underworld, his glory and joy goes down (καταβαίνω). Below him they would spread (στρωννύω) putrefaction (σῆψις related to “septic”), and over him there would be a covering (κατακάλυμμα) of worms. σκώληξ refers especially to the kind of worm that eats rotting corpses; such worms are also mentioned in 2 Macc 9:9.
12 A parallel rhetorical question introduced by πῶς matches that of 14:4, introducing a paragraph of the dirge that continues to express astonishment at the fate of such a lofty person as the king of Babylon falling so low. The height from which he fell is connoted by the label ἑωσφόρος, etymologically “dawn-bringer,” the name of the star that appears at the dawn. Greek ἀστήρ had the same connotation of “star” as English; it could be applied to an outstanding person. The bright star ἑωσφόρος was also known as Ἀφροδίτης ἀστήρ (Eudoxus, Ars astronomica 5.2), which was in turn also called Φωσφόρος (Geminus, Elementa astronmiae 1.28), meaning “light-bearer,” which is translated into Latin as lucifer. (ἑωσφόρος appears in some manuscripts of 2 Pet 1:19 for Φωσφόρος.) In any case, an illustrious person is meant. The connection between Lucifer and Satan is therefore not made here in Isaiah, but by Luke 10:18; Ottley also noted the similarity between Luke 10:15 and Isa 14:13, 15. Origen saw Lucifer as one of the fallen angels (Hom. Jes. Nav. 1.6) but did not imply he is their chief. In Comm. Ro. 8.9.4 he suggested Lucifer might be referring to Israel. Eusebius in his Commentary on Isaiah gave not the slightest indication of the interpretation of this fallen star as Satan, even though 2.7 shows he was familiar with fallen stars in the context of Satan falling from heaven by alluding to Luke 10:18 there. Rather, in commenting on 14:8-21, Eusebius took great pains to argue that this whole prophecy refers to the historical king of Babylon. Nevertheless, in Praep. ev. 7.16 he did connect Isaiah 14:12 with the leader of the fallen evil spirits. The participle ἀποστέλλων has a definite article in Q and the other uncials other than S; it has phonetic similarity to ἀνατέλλων earlier in the verse. G misread חולש as שולח and probably also על as כל. The ideas of falling to the earth are taken up in 2 Macc 9:7-8, but the parallels are not mainly on the level of vocabulary.
The dawn-bringer’s plan(14:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 14:4-11]]
13 After the rhetorical question, the pronouns shift back to the second person singular σύ. The nominatives in the preceding verse are not vocatives, since ἐξέπεσεν is third person. The private thoughts are indicated by ἐν τῇ
διανοίᾳ, rendering the Hebrew בלבב idiomatically. The rendering in Sinaiticus is more literal. Vaticanus has a different form for ἄστρων as well; by the second century, ἄστρον and ἀστήρ had become synonymous. The mention of the stars of the sky recalls 13:10. The king of Babylon plans to ascend even higher, to sit (καθίζω), i.e. be enthroned, on high mountains. Instead of οὐρανοῦ, Ziegler’s edition retroverts אל as θεοῦ, with support from Cyprian and Tyconius. The image of arrogance of reaching the stars of heaven is taken up in 2 Macc 9:10.
14 The upward mobility of the king does not stop with the mountains; he plans to be above the clouds, to the realm of the Most High. ὁ ὕψιστος is the standard translation of עליון, the title used of God (e.g., Gen 14:18; see Luke 1:32;Luke 6:35; Acts 7:4). This is the climactic expression of arrogance, the attitude condemned consistently in G. The arrogance of equating oneself to God is picked up by 2 Macc 9:12.
Those in Hades will be amazed(14:15-17)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
15 After that climax of arrogant imagination, the reality is broken to the king of Babylon: intstead of reaching the most high, he will reach the most low Hades, the very base of the world, even lower than earth itself. Instead of the accusative attested in both Marchalianus and Vaticanus, the genitive is the appropriate case for ᾅδου here (following Homer), since it is etymologically a proper name: (the abode) of Hades.
16 The reversal is a source of amazement for observers. The provocation he was known for (παροξύνω) is etymologically related to the word for sharpening.
17 They considered him ruthless, making the whole world (οἰκουμένη) a deserted place. Usually when τίθημι takes a double accusative, it is in the middle voice (Acts 20:28; 1 Cor 12:28). The phrase θεὶς τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην recalls especially 13:9, where God makes the world deserted, but also 10:14, 23; 13:5, 9, 11; anticipating 14:26; 37:18. The finite verb καθεῖλεν (aorist indicative of καθαιρέω) does not match the coordinated participle θείς. Another participle is expected, or at least a relative clause. The reappearance of ἐπαγωγῇ recalls 10:4; ἐπαγωγή generally means bringing in, so can be used for enticement, but in this military context, an “attack” would probably be understood, as in Polybius 10.23.7.
No honourable resting place for the dawn-bringer(14:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
18 The taunters compare the king of Babylon to other kings, who have stately burials. κοιμάω recalls 14:8, where the trees had not been chopped since they had fallen asleep. In the expression “each person in his house,” ἄνθρωπος is a literal translation of אישׁ, used distributively.
19 That will not be the fate of the king of Babylon, whose corpse will instead be disgraced. The phrase ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσιν has no counterpart in MT; Tov suggested it is here under influence of 34:3, which also has the passive of ῥίπτω and αἷμα: οἱ δὲ τραυματίαι αὐτῶν ῥιφήσονται καὶ οἱ νεκροί, καὶ ἀναβήσεται αὐτῶν ἡ ὀσμή, καὶ βραχήσεται τὰ ὄρη ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῶν. The Isaianic phrase is used by 2 Macc 9:28 ἐπὶ ξένης ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσιν οἰκτίστῳ μόρῳ κατέστρεψε τὸν βίον. Loathing is conveyed by the perfect passive participle of βδελύσσομαι. θνήσκω makes its only appearance in G here. The plural genitive ἐκκεκεντημένων and καταβαινόντων match the dead τεθνηκότων, so the “stabbed” who are going down are not the king but the dead; ἐκκεντέω is an appropriate but unprecedented translation of טען. Regarding the case of ᾅδου see the note on 14:15.
19 At this point the taunt ends, and first person pronouns are introduced. The image of a stained garment drives home the point that the king of Babylon’s offenses are beyond forgiveness. The staining is conveyed by the perfect passive participle of φύρω, prototypically “soak.” The words ἐν αἵματι … οὐκ ἔσται καθαρόν have no counterpart in Hebrew. The future (ἔσται) is not the expected tense; because οὐκ ἔσται καθαρόν is drawn from the next verse, the future here was probably chosen to match ἔσῃ there. Tov suggested ἐν αἵματι comes from 34:3.
20 The king’s offenses include destroying (ἀπώλεσας) “my” land and “my” people. ἀπόλλυμι is a favourite word of G; he uses it to translate 20 different Hebrew words. The introduction of a first-person singular pronoun μου indicates the dirge over the king of Babylon is over, although to this point there has been no explicit speaker since 13:3, 11. Eusebius identified the destruction of “my” land and people with the Babylonian capture of Israel. As a consequence of this destruction, the prophecy says he will not remain.
21 Eusebius said nothing about the Septuagint’s reading of 14:21, instead giving attention to the other translators, who imply the king of Babylon offered his own children as a sacrifice σφαγήν τε τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ τέκνοις προξενῆσαι. For the second σου “your father,” B has αὐτῶν “their father.” ἵνα expresses the purpose for preparing the children for slaughter: they are not supposed to rise (ἀναστῶσιν). By the time of Eusebius, resurrection from the dead would have been
understood, and the Christian reader would have recalled Matt 5:5 from τὴν γῆν κληρονομήσωσιν, but Eusebius did not develop these connections to Jesus’ preaching or resurrection.
ἐμπλήσωσι, the subjunctive of ἐμπίπλημι, matches the mood of ἀναστῶσιν and κληρονομήσωσιν.
22 Lord Sabaoth is now identified as the speaker, the subject of all the first person verbs since 14:20. He warns of his intention to oppose and destroy Babylonia. Several recurrences of vocabulary connect this verse to what preceded. The verb ἐπανίστημι recalls the enemies of 9:10. ἀπολῶ recalls 14:20, where Lord’s land was being destroyed.
23 The phrase θήσω … ἔρημον recalls 14:17 (see note there), where the whole world was deserted. The result of the destruction is that Babylonian will be inhabitable by hedgehogs. ὥστε with the infinitive normally is used in past contexts for the actual result (“with the result that”) but in future contexts can also be used for intended result “so that they could” (Matt 10:1; Luke 20:20). The reprisal of ἐχίνους recalls 13:22, where the hedgehog was building nests in a deserted Babylon. It will be demolished so thoroughly that it will become a clay pit.
24 Lord Sabaoth affirms his determination, as previously spoken. Nothing can change his mind.
25 He has determined to destroy (τοῦ ἀπολέσαι) the Assyrians from Israel (14:24-25). The mention of καταπάτημα recalls 5:5 and 7:25, where this trampling symbolized the desolation of Israel. The yoke is removed literarily at this point as well; after this chapter (and before this in 5:18; 9:3; 10:27; 14:5),
the word ζυγός does not appear again in G except for chapters 40 and 46-47. κῦδος appears only here in G; Seeligmann considered it a remarkably appropriate translation (Seeligmann 1948).
26 The prophecy ends with a final declaration of Lord Sabaoth’s determination. The two nominatives, Αὕτη ἡ βουλή must form a verbless clause since after the relative clause begins there is no independent finite verb. The subject is the more definite of the two nominatives: the demonstrative pronoun, indicating this (i.e., the preceding prophecy) is the decision that has been made. The same is true for αὕτη ἡ χεὶρ. The upraised hand image has appeared frequently (5:25; 9:11, 16, 20; 10:4) and here it is explained.
27 Lord Sabaoth’s decision cannot be foiled. διασκεδάσει, from διασκεδάζω or διασκεδάννυμι, means scatter to the winds. The rhetorical question is who will thwart (ἀποστρέψει) Lord’s plan?
28 A new saying (ῥῆμα) begins in 14:28. In Q, the entirety of the verse is indented within the column. The timing of the saying is indicated by the genitives Τοῦ ἔτους (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.4.9) and οὗ. Ahaz died around 720 bce (Watts 1998, 218).
29 The saying is addressed to foreigners. The etymology of ἀλλόφυλοι is “other-tribe,” and the word generally is used for what is foreign or alien. In the OG, it is used for non-Israelites, especially the Philistines. This is Eusebius’s interpretation; but he noted that their Greek name is Παλαιστίνοι “Palestinians” (1.69). These foreigners are not to be glad (εὐφραίνω). συνετρίβη recalls 14:5, where God shattered the yoke of the sinners. παίω recalls 14:6, where God hit a nation with a blow of his wrath. γάρ provides the reason such joy would be inappropriate (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.5): the crushing of their oppressor’s yoke. But that does sound like a cause for rejoicing. G apparently misunderstood כי to mean γάρ rather than ὅτι, which would mean do not rejoice that the yoke of those striking you has been broken. Eusebius understands the oppressor to be Ahaz (1.69). ὄφις “snake” is used for both נחשׁ and שׂרף in this verse. In 6:2, 6 שׂרף was rendered
σεραφείμ; in 1:7 as πυρίκαυστοι. The reference to ἔκγονα ἀσπίδων recalls 11:8, where the child would put its hand on their bed in peace. The clause τὰ ἔκγονα αὐτῶν ἐξελεύσονται ὄφεις πετόμενοι has two nominatives, even though ἔρχομαι is not a linking verb. The form in which they will go out is expressed by the second nominative, ὄφεις πετόμενοι (πετόμενοι is a literal translation of מְעוֹפֵף). The image is that their descendents will be even more fearsome than the parents.
30 This slithering and venomous race (as Eusebius called them, 1.69, identifying them as evil spirits since they fly through the air) will no longer interfere with the food supply of the poor. The passive forms of βόσκω are used for what the livestock does; the active forms for what the herder does. The referent of αὐτοῦ would seem to be σπέρματος ὄφεων. These words have no counterpart in Hebrew. Διά with the genitive here expresses agency (BDAG, s.v. διά A.4). ἄνδρες is supplied by G; it has no counterpart in Hebrew. The reference to εἰρήνη recalls Isaiah 11. ἐπʼεἰρήνης (“on” peace) means under the conditions of peace, so “peacefully” rather than “rest in peace,” which to English readers would connote death. ἀναπαύσονται is reprised from 11:2; 13:20, 21; 14:1, 3, 4, 7. The Hebrew root here is the same as in 13:20, 21, but not as in 11:2; 14:1, 3, 4, 7. Two different Hebrew words for killing are behind the two instances of ἀναιρέω. The first recalls 11:4, where the breath of lips would kill the impious. The two phrases τὸ σπέρμα σου and τὸ κατάλειμμά σου are both accusative; if they were nominative, the transitive verb ἀνελεῖ would have no object. σπέρμα appears four times in this chapter, the first time since chapter 1:4, 9. The mention of κατάλειμμα recalls 10:22 and especially 14:22, where κατάλειμμα and σπέρμα were also coordinated. It also anticipates 37:20, where κατάλειμμα and σπείραντες appear together.
31 The foreigners are warned that a pillaging army is coming from the north, but they will not touch the humble of Zion (14:32). ὀλολύζετε recalls 10:10, where the aorist form is used, and 13:6, where the present is used. The adressees are πύλαι (vocative plural). It is clear that κεκραγέτωσαν is a third person plural active imperative, but it is not clear what the tense is. It has a thematic (connecting) vowel ε, which appears only in the present and second aorist principal parts. Normally the perfect imperative is periphrastic (Smyth 1956a, sec. 599g),
and although inflected perfect imperatives do occur (Smyth 1956a, secs. 697–698), one of the examples from κράζω Smyth provides (κέκραχθι) does not use a thematic vowel, and the other does (κεκράγετε, in Vesp. 415). Of the three possibilities (reduplicated second aorist of κράζω, perfect of κράζω, or a present form of another verb, κεκράγω), the data Smyth provides favours understanding it as a second perfect (with present meaning) of κράζω. See also the discussion at 6:3. The cities are troubled (perfect passive participle of ταράσσω) at the sight of the smoke. Because οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι πάντες cannot be a nominative subject of an imperative, it must be vocative; the addressees are now the foreigners. βορρᾶ is the genitive of βορρᾶς, the colloquial form of βορέας, “north.” The Greek phrase οὐκ ἔστιν τοῦ εἶναι is so awkward that Ottley suggested some words are missing here, or that μεῖναι is the correct reading, from מעמד or לעמד. Silva has “there is no way to live,” with a note: “Gk uncertain” (2007). As the text stands, it expresses the absence of τοῦ εἶναι, which if understood as something that has being as its purpose, would mean what aims at existence does not exist. In context, it would probably be understood that what is needed for existence is not there.
32 The prophecy ends with a rhetorical question and its answer (as Brenton, Ottley, and Silva all have it), although τι could be the object of ἀποκριθήσονται rather than the interrogative pronoun, given the ὅτι clause following. In this case it would mean no different, but would be translated, “And the kings of nations will answer something, (namely) that Lord founded.…” In contrast to the arrogance of the wicked oppressors, it is the humble (ταπεινός recalling 11:4) who will be saved (aorist passive of σῴζω).
1 The title of the saying against Moabitis is indented from the left margin of the column in Q. The presence of κατά in the title recalls 1:1 (Judea, Jerusalem); 13:1 (Babylon), but even more exactly anticipates 17:1 (Damascus). Moabitis is an adjective referring to the Moabite city or land, with implied feminine singular πόλις or γῆ. Q spells the genitive form here as Μωαβίτιδος, with S and A; Swete spelled it Μωαβείτιδος throughout this chapter; only in 15:4 is it spelled Μωαβείτιδος in S. Richard D. Weis argued that the Moab oracles in Numbers 24; Isaiah 15-16; and Jeremiah 48 have influenced each other as they are preserved in the versions. The later versions (Targum, Peshitta) were more susceptible to such assimilation than the earlier Septuagint (Weis 2010). The saying prophesies the destruction of Moabitis by night (νυκτός), using a genitive of time. The existence of a city wall points to Moabitis being a city rather than a land.
2 Unspecified addressees (as in Isa 14) are instructed to grieve over themselves. The clue to their identity is the “for Lebedon” in apposition to “for yourselves” (ἑαυτοῖς). This place name Λεβηδών (as Ziegler also has it) was is spelled Δαιβηδών in S* and A; this was changed by Sinaiticus corrector cb3 to καὶ Δηβών, which is what Vaticanus has. Delta and lamda are shaped very much alike, and αι and ε are interchangeable, so Ziegler’s reading is very similar to that of S*, and best explains the various other manuscript readings (see Ziegler’s apparatus) (Ziegler 1939, 179). Eusebius wrote καὶ ∆ηβών, a reading shared with Vaticanus and Scb3 (and besides them only 46 88 and Syh). The relative pronoun οὗ is genitive to specify the location(Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.4.9), since ἐκεῖ resumes the sentence after the relative clause. The prepositional phrase ἐπὶ Ναβαὺ τῆς Μωαβίτιδος is more likely modifying κλαίειν than it is in apposition to ἐκεῖ, given the earlier parallel λυπεῖσθε ἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς. Now with the mention of Nabau, Moabitis appears to be a land rather than a city, assuming Nabau is a city within Moab.
2 The imperatives continue with ὀλολύζετε. The universal afflictions are baldness and cut arms. φαλάκρωμα recalls 3:24, where the women would have this “baldness” instead of golden head ornamentation. The arms are “cut up” (perfect passive participle of κατατέμνω). Although in classical usage, κατατέμνω results in multiple pieces of the thing cut, in biblical usage, ritual gashing of one’s own arms is meant, as in Lev 2:21; Hosea 7:14; 3 Kingdoms 18:28. Eusebius did not comment on this word.
3 The ritual interpretation of arm-cutting is confirmed by the following expressions of self-abasement. The Moabites are to go into the streets (πλατείαις from πλατύς “broad” ways), and wrap a belt around themselves (περιζώσασθε is from either περιζώννυμι or περιζωννύω). The morphologically nominative form πάντες must be vocative because the verb is imperative.
4 Cities are personified, expressing their dismay. κέκραγεν (which is clearly a perfect form because of its ending –εν) is in parallel with an aorist (see discussion
of the tenses of κράζω at 14:31); the Hebrew form is yiqtol. Q and A read ἐλάλησεν, and Q has a marginal note adding Ἐλεαλή; B has only Ἐλεαλή; S had both until ca corrected it to match Q/A. ἐλάλησεν is absent in B and therefore also Rahlfs & Ziegler. It has no counterpart in the Hebrew, and probably appeared as a Greek scribal error regarding the next word, Ἐλεαλή (the Hebrew is אלעלה, which has nothing to do with speaking). Q and S use the singular αὐτῆς (with A and Ziegler), since only Hesebon is mentioned; B (followed by Rahlfs) has the plural αὐτῶν because Eleale is also mentioned, making the cities plural. Loins cry out, which is not an image one would expect encounter, but other body parts call out in the next verse as well. γνώσεται is an obvious misreading of ירעה, “tremble” as ידעה, “know.”
5 Another body part, the heart, of Moabitis now cries out. The surprising reason for this (as introduced by the γάρ clause) is that she is a three-year-old heifer. G reasonably understood the place-name עגלת שׁלשׁיה as common nouns, “heifer of a third,” resulting in little sense in this context. Eusebius is no help here; he skipped over verses 3-6. This heifer is on the ἀνάβασις “ascent,” so I translate the cognate verb ἀναβήσονται likewise as “ascend.” The function of Ἁρωνιείμ could be genitive (“on the way of Haroneiim it cries out”), which would be parallel to “the ascent toward you,” or nominative (“on the way, Haronieim cries out”). Since the last subject was plural, a change to a singular subject is preferable, to match the singular verb βοᾷ. ΒΟΑ also could be read an imperative βοᾶ, in which case the translation would read “on the ascent toward you, you will ascend weeping on the way of Haronieim: Cry out, Ruin and earthquake!”
6 Swete spelled Νεμρείμ (the reading of Q and Ottley) as Νεμηρείμ, Rahlfs and Ziegler as Νεμριμ, S as Νεβρίμ. Eusebius located the water of Nemrim in the way of the Arabs (1.70).
7 Because the particle μή introduces a question expecting a negative answer, the meaning is that it is impossible for Moab to be saved. Silva has “Even so, will she be saved?” Ottley has “Is she like to be saved, even thus?” The conjunction γάρ is unexpected after a rhetorical question because it usually introduces the reason for an assertion.
7 The reason given for the impossibility of salvation is the speaker’s plan to bring the Arabs (accusative plural of Ἄραψ) upon the ravine. The combination of the ravine (φάραγξ) with waters gives the impression that Nemreim is a river. It is at this point the first person verb endings first appear, with ἐπάξω. Although unspecified, the speaker is most likely Lord. The Arabs are to capture αὐτήν, which because it is feminine singular most naturally refers to the ravine.8 The sounds of distress will extend across the entirety of Moab. Two parallel statements mention the cry reaching two geographical locations. συνάπτω normally indicates two things coming together, in this case the shout and the border, but the border is of course stationary. The noun ὀλολυγμός is cognate with ὀλολύζω, “wail,” “howl.” φρέαρ denotes a well, pit, or shaft. If it is a well-known geographical location, probably a well is meant.9 The disaster is depicted using another image involving water; it is blood-filled. In the phrase τὸ δὲ ὕδωρ τὸ Ῥεμμὼν, Ῥεμμὼν is in the position normally held by an attributive adjective, “the Remmon water,” but alternatively it could be a genitive (“the water of Remmon”) of an indeclinable noun Ῥεμμών. In manuscripts other than S, what appears as two places Δερμών and Νεμμών are the same place: Ῥεμμών in Q and A; Δειμών in B, in which case the γάρ makes more sense. The symbolism of a well filled (πίμπλημι) with blood is two-fold: it is the product of violent death, and it no longer sustains life. The two nouns σπέρμα and κατάλοιπον are in parallel, as are σπέρμα and the cognate κατάλειμμα in 14:22 and 14:30. Even in 1:9 we see the similar expression ἐγκατέλιπεν σπέρμα.1 There are three possibilities for the object of ἀποστελῶ. It could be an implicit object (“I will send things like reptiles…”) or gapped, with the preceding object understood (“I will send them like reptiles”), or the sentence could begin with the preceding καί (“and I will send the remnant of Adama like reptiles…”). This last option is preferable because it provides an object for ἀποστελῶ.Moab will flee(16:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 16:1-4]]
1 The prophecy foresees Moab as fugitives, in contrast to Zion. Μή indicates that the rhetorical question about Zion expects a negative answer; of course Zion is not a deserted rock.
2 The second person singular ἔσῃ comes unexpectedly. The last second person forms were in 15:2-3, but those were plural. Here, the identity of the addressee depends on the interpretation of the “daughter,” which is nominative θυγάτηρ in Q, A, B (followed by Ziegler, as well as in the original hand of S, but changed to vocative by corrector cb3 (followed by Rahlfs). If the nominative is intended rather than the vocative, the daughter is in apposition to the nestling, as something else to which the addressee is compared (“like a nestling and like a daughter of Moab”). However, even if it is nominative in form, the reader likely understood the vocative function because nominative and vocative forms are so often identical. The image used to express Moab’s vulnerability is a baby bird displaced from its nest. The genitive ἀνιπταμένου (from ἀνίπταμαι, a variation of ἀναπέτομαι, “fly away”) matches πετεινοῦ. For ἐπὶ τάδε (the reading of Q*, S, A, and B), Q’s corrector (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has ἔπειτα δέ. The two phrases could be spelled the same. The difference is that ἔπειτα indicates the deliberation should happen subsequently, whereas ἐπὶ τάδε would mean the deliberation should be “upon these things.”
3 Swete and Ziegler place πλείονα at the end of 16:2; Rahlfs places it at the beginning of verse 3. Since πλείονα is the object of βουλεύου, it is preferable to keep it with that verse, as Rahlfs does. Q has ποίει τε as two words, to maintain the singular, as does Ziegler, but S, Swete, and Rahlfs have the plural form ποιεῖτε, which does not match the singular Arnon, the addressee of this imperative. The Arnon is the major river in Moab, flowing into the middle of the east side of the Dead Sea, symbolizing all of Moab. Arnon is to provide a shelter of sorrow (πένθους, genitive of πένθος) for “her” (αὐτῇ). The identification of this feminine singular does not depend on whether the “daughter of Moab” was understood as nominative or vocative. Either way, the daughter of Moab is the closest matching potential referent (closer than the daughter of Zion). ἀπ’ἀρχῆς (the reading of Marchalianus, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus corrector C) is written the same as the genitive noun ἀπάρχης “of an official,” which makes no sense here. B* has ἀχθῇς and Rahlfs and Ziegler have ἀπαχθῇς, both second person subjunctives functioning as negative imperatives, which are still out of place. Silva translates Ziegler’s ἀπαχθῇς as “do not be taken away.” ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς is much preferable because it parallels διὰπαντός earlier in the verse. Eusebius’s commentary resumes here in 16:3; it omits comment on chapter 15 since 15:2.
4 The river and the Moabites are to shelter each other from the one causing the devastation. The translation of שׁד “destruction” as ἄρχων (16:4) is the result of misreading it as שַׂר, which refers to a commander, because of the similar-looking Hebrew letters Dalet and Resh. Relief is to come when this ruler dies.
6 As is typical in Isaiah, the primary crime is an attitude of egotistical arrogance, ὕβρις.
Moab will wail(16:7-10)[[@Bible:Isa 16:6-7]]
7 Swete and Ziegler place οὐχ οὕτως in verse 6, but Rahlfs has them in 16:7. The prophecy warns that such self-promotion will be self-defeating; it will end with wailing. οὐκ is probably the results of misreading Hebrew אל for אך. On the meaning of μελετάω see the commentary on 38:14. Although ἐντραπήσῃ could mean “feel misgiving” (LSJ II. Med. or Pass.), the meaning “feel shame” (LSJ II. 4. Abs.) is more common in the LXX.
8 Heshbon is a town in northern Moab, exemplifying Moab’s fate. She will change from a nation who devours others’ vines to one that has nothing of value. καταπίνοντες translates בלעי (“swallowing down”) instead of the MT בעלי (“lords”). Eusebius said Moab will grieve because their land had become deserted (1.71). Those wandering the wilderness (ἔρημον) are mentioned in the second person, then in the third person. In the latter case, they are also described as those sent (ἀπεσταλμένοι), which translates the Hebrew agricultural word שְׁלֻחוֹת (“offshoots”) literally.
9 Eusebius noted the change to first person verbs, and attributes these words to the prophet, who is so compassionate as to grieve with the Moabites for their fate. He said the fruit and vine symbolism refers to the bloom of youth, which in the Moabites’ case was wasted on partying (1.71).
10 The happiness that will be taken away is exemplified as winemaking.
Moab’s handmade things will not rescue him(16:11-12)[[@Bible:Isa 16:6-7]]
11 According to Eusebius, the distress of the prophet’s body parts (belly and inward parts) illustrates the inner anguish he feels at the Moabites’ fate.
12 The purpose of this distress is to cause the Moabites to feel shame over their idolatrous practices. Eusebius noted that the other translators have εἰς τὸ ἁγίασμα αὐτοῦ “enter its sanctuary” instead of “enter the works of her hands” (1.71).
13 The prophecy against Moab has an explicit conclusion, followed by one additional comment that the prophecy will be fulfilled within three years. Eusebius, however, showed a preference for the later Greek translations over the Septuagint in their renderings of 16:14 because they have a conjunction between the clause about the hired worker and the clause about the glory of Moab. He therefore applied the three-year time span not to the interval at the end of which the prophecy would be fulfilled, but to the time span over which the prophet prophesied against Moab at various times (1.71).
The verb ἀρθήσεται could refer to lifting or removal; the following ἀπό implies removal. πτῶσις normally denotes the state or condition of falling, but here refers to the result of falling, “calamity.”
2 The feminine nominative καταλελειμμένη refers to Damascus. The preposition εἰς κοίτην indicates what Damascus will become: a place where flocks sleep. Q and uncials other than S have οὐκ rather than οὐκέτι, i.e., without the implication that there was previously a pursuer.
4 The words Τάδε λέγει Κύριος Σαβαώθ are in verse 3 in Rahlfs. The paragraph division in Q matches that of Swete and Ziegler. The “day” referred to is when Damascus is brought down. Eusebius said Damascus and the dignity of those of the circumcision were destroyed at the same time (1.72).
The extent of the failing(17:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
6 Because ἄκρος designates an extremity, and μετέωρος raising, this combination refers to the tips of the tree’s highest branches. Eusebius, Dem. ev. 2.3 saw the fulfilment of this prophecy in the transfer of God’s favour from Israel to the believers, and in the conversion of idolators to the living God. He wrote, “By this it is clearly promised that the glory of Israel and all her riches will be taken away, and only a few, who like the few berries on an olive branch can be counted easily, will be left. These are the ones who believe in the Lord. Just after this there is a prophecy of the entire human race turning away from the error of idolatry and recognizing the God of Israel.”
8 Rather than the altars and handmade objects in which they had previously trusted, Q and S indicate that the idolators will instead place their trust in the Holy One of Israel; A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) do not include ἀλλ᾿ ἔσονται πεποιθότες ἐπὶ τὸν ἅγιον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ.
9 Because the expression ἀπὸ προσώπουfollows a Hebrew idiom (meaning presence) that is foreign to non-biblical Greek, I translate it with the equally striking English “face.”
The unfaithful seed will blossom(17:11)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
11 The phrase κληρώσῃ τοῖς υἱοῖς σου has no equivalent in the Hebrew. For κληρώσῃ (the reading also of A, B, papyrus 965, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has κλήρωσιν.
12 Although BDAG’s entry on πολύς indicates that “great” could be an appropriate English gloss when modifying a plural noun such as ἐθνῶν πολλῶν, the sense of “great” would not be that of the English “great nations,” which implies something about the nation’s size, reputation, influence, or glory. Rather, the meaning is more like the English “a great number of nations,” as in ὕδατα πολλά (a great amount of water, John 3:23) or κτήματα πολλά (a great amount/number of possessions, Mark 10:22), or as in ὄχλοι πολλοί (a great number of people, Matt 4:25). The verb ἠχέω is used for the production of any sound; when water is the subject, “roar” is appropriate in English, but the specific connotation of roaring referring to animal sounds is not in the Greek.
13 The adverb πόρρωis as ambiguous as the English “far.” It could describe the extent of the pursuit, the location of the pursuit, or the distance between the pursuer and the pursued. Brenton and Ottley both have “afar.” Q is unique in having the plural genitive participle λικμώντων match the genitive ἀχύρων in number; in S, A, B (Rahlfs and Ziegler, it is a genitive absolute ἀχύρου (Porter 1992, sec. 10.2.1).
14 Jerome commented (5.17.12-14) that the historical fulfilment of this verse (Sennachereim) is preferable to seeing the fulfilment by the Romans, by Christ, by the Jews’ rejection of Jesus, and by the persecution of the church.
1 Οὐαί normally takes a dative, but here it has the vocative πτέρυγες; the “wings” are being addressed, not the genitive γῆς. The meaning of wings of a land of ships is obscure. Eusebius resorts to finding his interpretation in the next verse, especially in the translations of Symmachus and Aquila, who speak of emissaries (ἀποστέλλων ἀποστόλους). He finds fulfilment of this prophecy in what Paul implies in Acts 28:21-22: that Jews all over the world had been warned about Christians. The “wings” are described as being beyond (ἐπέκεινα) Ethiopia. Cyril of Alexandria commented about this land beyond Ethiopia, and he found the historical referent in the time of Isaiah: “At certain times the Israelites foolishly abandoned God the Savior of all and fell into the error of worshiping many gods.… The Israelites, in particular those living in Jerusalem, had approached the Egyptians and pleaded with them to become allies. They
needed their support because they were being invaded by the Babylonians.” These Egyptians were the ones trodden down by their devotion to idols.
2 Unlike Symmachus, G calls those sent ὅμηρα, hostages. The preposition ἐν could be understood to denote either the means or the destination of the sending. The parallel ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος indicates the means is the preferable interpretation. The messengers mentioned in other manuscripts (S, A, B, papyrus 965, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) are absent in Q, leaving κοῦφοι, “nimble,” to function substantively despite being anarthrous. The receiving nation is μετέωρον, “lofty,” but also harsh (χαλεπόν). The repeated use of ἐπέκεινα recalls 18:1. Hippolytus Antichr. 58-59 cited 18:1-2 as a prediction that the people would try to attack the people of God through a mortal man who would send letters to the saints, commanding them to cut them all off everywhere.
The rivers’ territory will be inhabited(18:2-5)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
2 Hippolytus identified the Christians as those who “are persecuted and trodden down” by those unbelievers. The “wings of the vessels” are the churches; the “sea” is the world, in which the Church is set, like a ship with Christ as her Pilot.
3 There is no verb to match the subject οἱ ποταμοί, so this could be part of a verbless clause, or a vocative, or a nominative absolute. The third person αὐτῶν would not be expected if this were a vocative. The following series of ὡς phrases belong together, since they have similar syntax, beginning with the comparator and ending with the verb (with subject, if it is explicit). The nominative ἡχώρααὐτῶν could be the subject of the preceding κατοικηθήσεται or the following ἀρθῇ.
4 The first person pronoun μοι referring to the prophet is unusual. The adverb οὕτως indicates that the content of the speech is about to be reported. Imagery of the genitives καύματος (heat), μεσημβρίας (midday), and δρόσου (dew) symbolize the pervasive ubiquity of the security Lord provides. The Hebrew behind harvest (ἀμήτου) is קציר.
5 The Hebrew קציר appears again, but this time G translates θερισμοῦ. Both ἄμητος and θερισμός can refer to either the time or the product of harvesting.
Lord will prune before harvest(18:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
5 ὄμφαξ denotes an unripe, sour grape, but is also used more generally for immaturity. Both the noun and verb forms of both words are used in the phrase ὄμφαξ ἀνθήσει ἄνθος ὀμφακίζουσα. βοτρύδια are clusters; the lexicons LSJ and LEH offer “little clusters” as a gloss, in which case the adjective μικρά is redundant.
The pruning hook used to prune the vine is a δρέπανον, and a branch that will be cut off (future of κατακόπτω) is κληματίς.
6 The object changes from plural αὐτούς to singular αὐτόν.
7 The only finite verb in 18:7 is ἀνενεχθήσεται. τεθλιμμένου is the perfect passive participle of θλίβω; τετιλμένου is the perfect passive participle of τίλλω, meaning “pluck” (especially pulling out feathers or hair). Although λαοῦ refers to the same two people in both cases, the preposition changes from ἐκ λαοῦ to ἀπὸ λαοῦ. This expression μεγάλου ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον seems out of place between two descriptions of how troubled the nation is. The phrase ἔθνος ἐλπίζον καὶ καταπεπατημένον recalls 18:2; in S, the two phrases are identical (ἔθνος ἀνέλπιστον καὶ καταπεπατημένον). The geopgraphical use of μέρος indicates a region or district of land. The reappearance of ποταμοῦ recalls 18:1, where the rivers were plural.
1 The adjective κοῦφος has a double meaning in Greek: both swift, and lightweight; in G, speed is the primary meaning. Chrysostom quoted Isaiah 19:1 to show that God always appears out of a cloud (Homilies on Matthew 56.5 when describing the Father’s voice from the cloud in the transfiguration in Matt 17:5; Homilies on Acts 2, explaining why a cloud received Jesus at his ascension). Cyril likewise interpreted chapter 19 as referring to the conversion of Egypt from idolatry to faith in God. The “swift cloud” might mean the Lord’s body, the blessed Virgin [Jerome, Homilies on the Psalms 11 (on Psalm 77) and Psalm 24 (on Psalm 96)], but Cyril preferred to understand the cloud as Christ. He played with the double meaning of “swift” and “light/buoyant,” comparing the ability of human minds to lose their heavy burdens and go upward (Wilken 2007, 195). Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on χειροποίητος (Croughs 2001). Tertullian said Egypt refers to the superstitions of the whole world (Adv. Jud. 9). Similarly, Theodoret quoted Hippolytus from his discourse on the beginning of Isaiah: “He likens the world to Egypt; its idolatry, to images; its removal and destruction to an earthquake. The Word he calls the ‘Lord’ and by a ‘swift cloud’ he means the right pure tabernacle enthroned on which our Lord Jesus Christ entered into life to undo the fall” (NPNF2 3:177). Theodoret, in his letter 151 to the Monks of the Euphratensian, the Osrhoene,
Syria, Phoenicia, and Cilicia quoted 19:1 “He shakes the idols of Egypt” to refer to Jesus’ divine nature even during his escape to Egypt. In his commentary he wrote, “The facts confirm the prophecy. The error of polytheism was extinguished, and the one who rides on a swift cloud is worshiped by the Egyptians” (Wilken 2007, 196). The verb ἡττάομαι normally means be inferior, i.e., overcome. Eusebius interpreted the phrase ἀπὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ to that mean an invisible power will cause the hearts to be dismayed (1.73). He argued that the Jews cannot point to a time when this prophecy was fulfilled, since Egypt did not forsake idolatry until they adopted Christianity (Dem. ev. 6.20; 8.5; 9.2).
2 The noun νομός is not to be mistaken for νόμος (custom, law), but district or province, especially of Egypt (see Herodotus 2.4; Diodorus Siculus 1.54). The sentiment of 19:2 is reminiscent of Isaiah 3:5 καὶ συμπεσεῖται ὁ λαός, ἄνθρωπος πρὸς ἄνθρωπον καὶ ἄνθρωπος πρὸς τὸν πλησίον αὐτοῦ· προσκόψει τὸ παιδίον πρὸς τὸν πρεσβύτην, ὁ ἄτιμος πρὸς τὸν ἔντιμον, but verb is different, and the preposition is lacking here. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on ἐπεγερθήσονται (2001, 84). Matt 24:7, Mark 13:8, and Luke 21:10 allude to Isa 19:2. They all have the same relevant phrase: ἐγερθήσεται ἔθνος ἐπὶ ἔθνος καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν, the only difference is that Matthew and Mark insert γάρ as the second word.
3
Egypt ruled by harsh kings(19:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
3 The English word ventriloquist etymologically means “belly-speaker” in Latin, and that is also the origin of the Greek word ἐγγαστρίμυθος (spelled ἐνγαστριμύθους by the original hand of Q). An ancient ventriloquist was a religious authority; she would interpret the sounds made by her digestive system, where it was thought the spirits of the dead dwelt. The earliest mention of ventriloquism is by the Pythia (Oracle) at Delphi. Eurycles of Athens was the most famous gastromancer. The verb ἐπερωτήσουσιν is used without the accusative of the thing asked, corresponding to “consult” or “inquire of.” The noun ἄγαλμα is used for glory, or a pleasing gift, but more specifically for a statue. The phrase τοὺς ἐκ τῆς γῆς φωνοῦντας recalls 8:19. The Hebrew verb is the same in both verses, but there the Greek verbs were forms of ζητέω.
4 The first-person verb παραδώσω continues the speech from 19:3. The instance of κυρίων is a rare instance of this word not referring to Lord. σκληρῶν recalls Isaiah 8, where this adjective appears three times. The series of plural genitives
ἀνθρώπων κυρίων σκληρῶν could be read two ways. κυρίων σκληρῶν could either be in apposition with ἀνθρώπων, or qualifying ἀνθρώπων. In other words, either the people are harsh masters, or have harsh masters.
5 Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on καὶ πίονται οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ὕδωρ (Croughs 2001, 85). Drinking water from next to the sea would be brackish and salty, but the Egyptians would have no options because the river will have given out, ἐκλείπω, a word typically referring to coming to the end of one’s existence for lack resources, i.e., giving up, failing, or vanishing.
6 The original hand of Q (as well as S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) wrote διώρυγες; Q’s corrector and B read the form διώρυχες (from διῶρυξ, “canal”), which appears in Herodotus 2.108, 138; Xenophon Anabasis 1.7.15. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on πᾶσα συναγωγὴ ὕδατος (Croughs 2001, 87). A συναγωγή can refer to any gathering; ἕλος is marshy ground.
7 The Egyptian word ἄχι (also ἄχελ) refers to a reed-grass used for lamp wicks. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on τὸ ἄχι (2001, 87), κύκλῳ τοῦ ποταμοῦ (2001, 88), and ἀνεμόφθορον (2001, 89). The word κύκλῳ can function as adverb or preposition. When it has an accusative or genitive following, it functions as a preposition. Tov noted that the preposition διά was added before τοῦ ποταμοῦ “in accordance with the rules of the Greek language or translational habits” (The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture). Usually the root *φθορ carries the sense of corruption or ruin.
8 The occupation of those who are expressing their discontent (στενάζω) is ἁλιεύς, which refers to those who work on the sea, typically as a fisher, as the context here confirms. Although Q, S and A have the singular ἄγκιστρον “fish-hook,” B has the plural ἄγκιστρα. There is some variation in the tense as well. Q, A, and B have the present; S has the aorist. The meaning is the same, but the present is expected. In the next clause, we have the present, with a plural object. The form σαγήνας is the plural accusative of σαγήνη, a dragnet. An ἀμφιβολεύς is one who uses an ἀμφίβληστρον, a kind of fish-net that is cast, as in Mark 1:16. These are prophesied to experience sadness (future of πενθέω).
The skillful and wise will be undone(19:9–12)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
9 λίνον refers to anything made of flax (linen), whether lamp-wick or fishing net or line (as in Mark 1:18). βύσσος similarly refers to flax and the linen made
from it. The adjective σχιστός normally means “divided.” The fishing connotations may have come to the reader’s mind, in the context of the previous verse, and according to Muraoka this is a torn fishing net. But the upcoming parallel is may point to to the flax plant rather than to fishing lines. LSJ identifies λίνον σχιστόν as “lint” in Hippocrates, but “fine flax” in Isa 19:9, as does LEH. Eusebius lumps together the workers of the two materials, split flax and linen.
10 Instead of ζῦθον (the reading of Q, A, B, S corrector cb2, followed by Rahlfs), the original hand of S reads ζυγόν, and Ziegler has ζῦτον. Greek gamma and tau are visually similar. ζῦθον and ζῦτον are alternate spellings for Egyptian barley beer. Note that the contract vowel in πονέω does not undergo lengthening in later Greek (LSJ).
11 Because μωρός is an adjective that could have a substantival function, the translation “will be fools” would also convey the same point. Τάνις was a town in lower Egypt. This nominative phrase οἱ σοφοὶ σύμβουλοι taken in context, is hanging independently (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.1.5). Grammatically, it could be understood as a verbless clause on its own,or in apposition to the leaders, or resumed by αὐτῶν. No matter how the constituents are related, the meaning is the same: the leaders of Tanis are foolish even though they think themselves wise and are misleading the king. Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on συνετῶν (Croughs 2001, 90). Athough the expected preposition before ἀρχῆς would be ἀπ’, we find ἐξ instead. ἀρχή can refer to leadership or beginning; here it translates קדם.
12 Paul in 1 Cor 1:20 alluded to Isa 19:11-12, without using the exact words: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; ποῦ συζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
13 The Hebrew שׂרי behind ἄρχοντες clearly refers to leadership rather than beginning.
14 Although πλανᾶταιcould be understood as middle or passive (with an external agent), because πλανάω appeared in the preceding verse in the active voice, it is preferable to see an external agent here as well, therefore I translate “led astray”
rather than “go astray.”Although the topic is similar, it is not entirely clear that 1 Timothy 4:1 alludes to Isa 19:14, with its ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως προσέχοντες πνεύμασιν πλάνοις καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων. Where the other manuscripts (S, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have ἐμῶν, the first-hand of Q wrote αμων; Q’s reading was later corrected to αιμων.
15 Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on κεφαλὴν καὶ οὐρὰν καὶ ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος (2001, 91); though note that Q does not precede ἀρχὴν with καὶ. Although ἀρχή can refer to leadership or beginning, here it translates כפה, a shoot of reeds.
16 Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ (2001, 92); Q does not have ἐν preceding τρόμῳ.
17 Although it has been suggested that Luke 21:11 alludes to Isa 19:17 with its σεισμοίτεμεγάλοικαὶκατὰτόπουςλιμοὶκαὶλοιμοὶἔσονται, φόβητράτεκαὶἀπʼ οὐρανοῦσημεῖαμεγάλαἔσται, the similarity involves only one lexical item, φόβητρον / φόβητρα. The relationship is not one of literary dependence. The commentaries of Cyril and Theodoret explain that the “terror” is the reverence and awe that Egyptians of their day had toward the places Jesus lived (Wilken 2007, 195).
18 The reading of Q, A, B (Rahlfs, Ziegler) πόλις ἁσεδέκ, is orthographically compatible with Sinaiticus scribe cb3’s πόλεις ἁσεδέκ. The earliest reading of S was Πόλις Ἁσεδηλίου; the change to Πόλις Ἁσε (by corrector ca) was followed by cb3’s change to πόλεις ἁσεδέκ. The MT has עִ֣יר הַהֶרֶס; Qumran (1QIsaa and 4Q56) has עיר החרס. Aquila and Theodotion have αρες, and Symmachus translated the same, חרס, as “sun.” Vaccari concluded that G read קיר הסדח where his Vorlage actually had קיר הסרח (Vaccari 1921). Ασεδ is from חסד, from the same three characters as חרס, but with a visual misreading and a transposition. A plausible explanation of the development of the variants is as follows: The original Hebrew was החרס (Qumran, Symmachus); G read חסד and wrote ασεδ; Symmachus read חרס and wrote ηλιου; Aquila and Theodotion read הרס or חרס and wrote αρες; ασεδκληθήσεται (in A, B) became ασεδεκκληθησεται when dictated; it also became ασεδηλιουκαικληθησεται when Sinaiticus or its ancestor conflated the Old Greek ασεδ with
Symmachus’s ηλιου. The MT read החרס as ההרס. In his explanation of Isa 11:15, Eusebius said the Egyptians would give up their superstitions and “swear by the name of the Lord,” quoting 19:18 (Comm. Isa. 1.64). On 19:18, he said Egyptians now swear in Chananite when they use the Hebrew words “alleluia and amen and Sabbath and such others as are found in the divine Scripture,” and when they swear it is to the Lord of hosts. The five cities are five divisions in the Church: the bishops, elders, deacons, the enlightened, and those present in the one city, named Asedek “righteousness,” which is the Church. The Hebrew is Areopolis, soit should be “the one city will be called the city of the earth” (Comm. Isa. 1.76). He referred to these cities being divisions again in Comm. Isa. 2.23. In Onomasticon, Eusebius again wrote, “in Hebrew this name should be written Aares which is dryness and some interpret ‘in the sun,’ but others translate ‘in the clay’ probably designating either Heliopolis or Ostracinas” (GCS 11,1.38; trans. Wolf).
20 For the form κεκράξονται see the discussion in Isa 6. Eusebius saw the mention of “Savior” as a reference to Jesus, since he claimed that is what Jesus means in Hebrew. Lactantius (Inst. 4.13; Epit. 44) quoted 19:20 to say that Jesus was a man: “And God shall send to them a man, who shall save them, shall save them by judging.” Theodotus (Excerpts 16) quoted the same verse to argue that God shows his power (cures, prophecies, signs) through the agency of men. Cyril commented that the “pillar” was a church or a replica of the cross, and the “altar” referred to the Christian altars all over Egypt (Wilken 2007, 196). Theodoret said the singular “pillar” is used because it refers to the Church throughout the whole world (quoting 1 Tim 3:15 and Matt 16:18), but the singular refers to many altars and houses of prayer. However, Jerome mentioned a different fulfilment, one that is taken up by recent interpreters of Greek Isaiah (van der Kooij 1987; Kim 2009):
During the conflict between Antiochus the Great and the generals of Ptolemy, Judea, which lay between them, was rent into contrary factions, the one group favoring Antiochus and the other favoring Ptolemy. Finally the high priest, Onias, fled to Egypt, taking a large number of Jews along with him, and he was given by Ptolemy an honorable reception. He then received the region known as Heliopolis, and by a grant of the king, he erected a temple in Egypt like the temple of the Jews, and it remained standing up until the reign of Vespasian, over a period of 250 years.… For Onias affirmed that he was fulfilling the prophecy written by Isaiah: “There shall be an altar of the Lord in Egypt, and the name [inscription] of the
Lord shall be found in their territories.” And so this is the matter referred to in this passage: “The sons of the transgressors of your people,” who forsook the law of the Lord and wished to offer blood sacrifices to God in another place than what he had commanded. They would be lifted up in pride and would boast that they were fulfilling the vision, that is, the thing that the Lord had enjoined. But they shall fall to ruin, for both temple and city shall be afterwards destroyed (Comm. Dan. 3.11.146).
21 The noun εὐχή can refer to a vow (where a promise is made by the suppliant) or more generally to prayers where no such promise is made. The verb ἀποδίδωμι refers to fulfilling obligations, restoring things to they way they ought to be. The combination of εὐχή and ἀποδίδωμι indicates vows are in view.
22 Where Q and A have ἐπακούσεται, Sinaiticus scribe B originally wrote the plural εἰσακούσονται but corrected it to the singular εἰσακούσεται (the reading also of B and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
23 Although in the last two paragraphs, the demonyms (Egyptians and Assyrians) all had articles, in this paragraph none of them except the last two have articles in Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); S and B lack an article for the last instance of Egyptians; in the same paragraph Eusebius once agreed with S and once with A). Eusebius identified the Assyrians with the Syrians (Antiochus and Demetrius), and the Egyptians with the Ptolemaic empire. Because these two empires had historically never had fellowship and interrelations between them, Eusebius considered this a prophecy of the peace that would obtain after the arrival (ἄφιξις) of the Lord (1.77).
24 Justin Martyr swapped the order of τρίτος and Ἰσραὴλ when he quoted
19:24 to the effect that there will be another Israel (the people of Christ); Q reflects this transposition. He then wrote, “Since then God blesses this people, and calls them Israel, and declares them to be His inheritance, how is it that you repent not of the deception you practise on yourselves, as if you alone were the Israel, and of execrating the people whom God has blessed?” (Dial. 123). He also alluded to this blessing in Dial. 125. The transposition of Egyptians and Assyrians in B (and Q) is an example of why Vaticanus is considered hexaplaric.
25 G read the Hebrew differently than the MT. He read the masculine passive ברוך where we have ברכה. He read the singular ברך for ברכו. He put a relative and a preposition at the beginning of מצרים and אשׁור and ignored all but the conjunction of ומעשׂה ידי. These few changes alter the meaning drastically. Croughs (2010, 367) pointed her readers to Baer (Baer 2001, 230); L. Mongsengwo-Pasinya (Monsengwo-Pasinya 1985, 198–207); and van der Kooij (van der Kooij 1987, 156).
1 At first glance, the name Ταναθάν might appear to be accusative, but once the prepositional phrase is read, the nominative makes more sense. The particle ἡνίκα introduces a clause indicating the time.
Isaiah goes naked and barefoot(20:2)
2 Isaiah is ordered to ἄφελε (imperative of ἀφαιρέω), “remove” his sackcloth and ὑπόλυσαι (middle imperative of ὑπολύω) his sandals so that he will be ἀνυπόδετος (a variant spelling of ἀνυπόδητος) “barefoot.” The meaning of γυμνός, the standard translation of עָרוֹם, is not necessarily totally naked, according to BDAG (which categorizes Isa 20:2 as lightly clad) and GELS (which says, “Γυμνός does not necessarily mean ‘stark-naked’ but ‘scantly clad’: one wearing only χιτών ‘tunic, undergarment’ may still be described as γ.: see LSJ, s.v. 5 and LSG s.v., and cf. γ. καὶ ἀνυπόδετος Isa 20.2 (with no sackcloth round one’s waist), ~ὴ καὶ ἀσχημονοῦσα Ez 16.7, and descriptive of a defeated nation being taken into captivity Isa 20.4; ἀμφίασιν ~ῶν ‘clothes of…’ Job 22.6.”). Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 2.11) cited 20:2 in support of his argument not to be concerned with clothing. Origen (Cels. 7.7) referred to the same verse as an example of the biography of a prophet. Chrysostom (Hom. Matt. 18, on Matt 5:40) also cited 20:2 when commenting on Jesus’ command to “let him have your cloak also” (Matt 5:40), to say that going without clothing for the sake of God’s command is no disgrace. The reading ποίησον is shared with A, B, and S corrector ca
who changed from ποιησεν, which is the only attestation of that reading. Rahlfs and Ziegler have ἐποίησεν with the MT and no Greek manuscript support.
Isaiah’s nakedness explained(20:3–6)
3 Instead of ἔτη, the reading of Q, A, and adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler, S has the uncorrected mistake ἔτης (αἰτῇς was meant). B has ἔτη, τρία ἔτη. Q, A, S corrector ca (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read the plural σημεῖα; the first-hand of Sinaiticus wrote the singular σημεῖον; B has εἰς σημεῖα. The parallel τέρατα is plural.
4 καλύπτω means cover, and ἀνακαλύπτω means uncover, which fits the symbolic behaviour.
5 Because ἡττάομαι does not normally take ἐπί (which here translates the preposition מ), ἐπί should be understood to modify αἰσχυνθήσονται rather than ἡττηθέντες. One of G’s favorite words, πεποιθότες, here translates מבט, “hope.” The vocabulary choice δόξα is readily explainable as a literal translation of תפארת. How this would have been undersood by a Greek reader is harder to answer. The prototypical meaning “opinion” in classical Greek is not obvious in this context; here it would have been understood perhaps in the sense of “honour,” i.e., the Egyptians increased in reputation by their association with the Ethiopians. Eusebius said Isaiah’s willingness to go naked shows that he did not care about δόξα among humans.
6 The phrase τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ is a literal translation of האי הזה. The phrase κατοικοῦντες ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ appears again in 23:2 (but without ταύτῃ) and 23:6. The island is Egyptian, since the inhabitants of the island say they had been “trusting,” which is what the Egyptians were doing in 20:5. The temple islands of Elephantine or Philae come to mind, especially in the context of their southern neighbour. Instead of ἠδύναντο, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has the imperfect ἐδύναντο.
1 In verse 1 we immediately see a change from plural storms to singular. The Hebrew yam is omitted in Q’s first-hand, S, A, B, (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but Q’s marginalia adds τῆς θαλάσσης; perhaps “wilderness of the sea” was changed to “wilderness” because G thought wildernesses only belonged on land. Or it is possible that he had in mind the fulfillment of the prophecy on land. It is not likely he had a specific storm in mind, considering the verb is
optative (διέλθοι); the optative only appears seven times in G. Notably, both מדבר and נגב become ἔρημος “desert.” But this is not an intentional change of meaning, since ἔρημος is the second most common rendering of Negev in the Pentateuch. The adjective φοβερόν “fearsome” is neuter, so it is taken with τὸ ὅραμα (20:2) rather than καταιγίς. The use is not adverbial because that would make the καί in verse 2 awkward. G changed what it modifies from “land” to “vision.” This is reasonable since the translator was working through the text sequentially; evidently he thought the sentence ended with ארץ, so he began his next with נוראה חזות, a predicative order for adjectives. Now that he understood the adjective predicatively, he had to add the article to his translation.
2 G turned the Hebrew כל, “all” into νῦν, “now,” perhaps reading כן rather than כל. The Hebrew word for “loins” is plural, but this is changed to singular for good Greek.
3 The first person verbs are on the lips of the person who received the vision, and upon whom are the Elamites and the Persians (21:2). His loins are filled (aorist passive of ἐμπίπλημι), but not with any power, rather ἔκλυσις, which denotes loss of force. Instead of the accusative τό (the reading also of S, A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) B has τοῦ, indicating the purpose rather than the manner of being hasty.
4 In verse four, the qatal becomes the present tense “wander” and “immerse.” The active form πλανᾶται means to cause to stray, and the passive to stray, so πλανάω is a reasonable rendering of תעה. G did not know what to do with פַּלָּצוּת so called in ἀνομία, as he tends to do when at a loss. He also apparently did not know what to do with בעת and figured the similar-sounding “bapt” would be a good substitute. The Hebrew נשףwas certainly read as נפש, becoming ἡ ψυχή; חִשְׁקִי was then slightly redundant, and was omitted. This inner being (ψυχή) stands, contemporary with the speech; the use of ἐφίστημι is intransitive, a perfect form referring to the “present” time, matching the present tense verbs. Surprisingly, Eusebius did not comment on the combination of baptism with commands to eat and drink. The only other two writers to mention 21:4 are Theodoret, who commented on this verse in his Interpretatio in Esaiam, and Jerome, who mentioned it in his Commentary on Daniel 2.5.
Babylon has fallen!(21:5–9)
5 In place of the singular ἑτοίμασον of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the plural ἑτοιμάσατε which better matches the following plural imperatives. The reason for preparing the table is not as clear as the reason for preparing the shields. G ignored צָפֹה הַצָּפִית. The reason is not readily apparent. It is possible that he did not understand the word, so omitted it, but this is not likely if he was familiar with Exodus, where it appears dozens of times, usually translated as a compound of –χρυσ-. He understood the string of infinitive absolutes as imperatives, and changed the imperative string to a participle and imperative, for Greek style. But there is no apparent reason why he changed the singular of imperatives “eat” “drink” to plurals unless he did identify
them as infinitive absolutes. No reason for reversing the order of eating and drinking is apparent. The reappearance of ἄρχοντες recalls the address to the leaders in 13:2; almost always in Isaiah ἄρχων is a negative label (e.g., 1:23; 16:4).
6 The participle βαδίσας is dependent on the imperative στῆσον, giving an attendent circumstance, so both are translated into English as commands. The reflexive σεαυτῷ refers to the one being commanded, hence the translation “yourself”; it modifies στῆσον rather than βαδίσας. He is to go, and to set up a σκοπόν, “watch-person.” The verb ἀναγγέλλω normally takes the content of what is reported or announced in the accusative case (usually neuter), and the person to whom it is reported in the dative case. Here the object is masculine accusative, so the watchperson is to announce whomever he sees. G fell victim to a misunderstanding that had significant consequences for his translation of the rest of the oracle. He apparently translated the לך twice, the first time as the imperative לֵךְ, becoming Βαδίσας, then then again as לְךָ, becoming σεαυτῷ. He reasonably understood this לְךָ to refer to the person who was to become the watcher, as in “set yourself as a watchman.” Since he understood the watchman to be the prophet, so he changed the 3rd person יִרְאֶה to the 2nd person ἴδῃς, and likewise, the 3rd person יַגִּיד to a 2nd person imperative. Gregory Nazianzen claimed to take the role of a “watcher,” announcing the disobedience of his people (Oration [16].16).
7 Although at first glance it would seem more natural to take εἶδον as a first person singular, this could be third person plural. The plural noun ἱππεῖς (not ἵππος horse but ἱππεύς horseman) could be nominative or accusative, but ἀναβάτας is already an accusative, so nominative is preferable, unless either ἀναβάτης or ἱππεύς is an adjective, or the two nouns are in apposition. Ottley has “I saw two mounted horsemen,” and Silva translated, “I saw two riding horsemen,” both treating ἀναβάτης as an adjective. The accusative ἀκρόασιν πολλὴν is more like an adverbial accusative than a direct object, hence the translation, “listen to a long recitation.” In G’s translation, the
watchman continues to be the prophet, so now the verbs become 1st person rather in Greek than 3rd person as they are in Hebrew. The word vocalized as רֶכֶב in the Masoretic tradition was read as רֹכֵב.
8 The imperative of καλέω with the prepositional phrase is used in the sense of summoning or appointing. The initial aleph of the word vocalized as Arieh in the Masoretic Text and read as Ouria by G was likely originally a ה, i.e., הָרֹאה, according to the Qumran Great Isaiah Scroll. Here, the continued identification of the prophet as the watchman caused even the 3rd person וַיִּקְרָא to be changed to a 2nd person imperative. This move required Ouria to become the object rather than the subject of the verb. The מִצְפֶּה was reasonably understood to be in the construct state, resulting in Κύριος in the genitive rather than vocative. When G finally encountered an explicit first person subject pronoun אָנֹכִי, he realized he needed to change to the first person, so he added the third person εἶπεν to introduce the first-person speech. The reading καί where B has Κύριος can be explained if Κύριος were written as a nominum sacrum Κ̅Ϲ̅, which resembles ΚΕ. The reading of Q, S, A (without Κύριος) means the (third-person) speaker must be Ourias. The implied noun with διὰ παντός is time, so the meaning is “throughout.” The word that is a present participle עֹמֵד in the Masoretic text was reasonably read as a qatal form עָמַד, and therefore became an aorist indicative. Interestingly, but expectedly, both עמד and נצב are rendered as ἔστην. The reading ἐγώ (S, B) represents the Hebrew אנכי; it is absent in Q, A, and the editions of Rahlfs and Ziegler.
9 The subject is made redundantly emphatic by αὐτός. Because συνωρίς is a pair of horses, the “rider” must have been a charioteer. The two wayyiqtols were changed to a participle and aorist indicative, for Greek style. The referent of the pronoun αὐτῆς is Babylon. In formal parallel with the noun ἀγάλματα is χειροποίητα, things made by human hands. אֱלֹהֶיהָ “her gods” was read as ʾelileyha, which typically gets rendered as χειροποίητα. For the plural συνετρίβησαν (Q, S, A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has the singular συνετρίβη, which would be proper for neuter plural subjects.
Also in 14:12 we see the end of something being in the earth: “beneath you they will spread decay, and your covering will be a worm.” Revelation 14:8 and 18:2 link Isa 21:9 and Isa 51:17. Rev 14:8 has Ἔπεσεν, ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη, ἣ ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς πεπότικεν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. Rev 18:2 has καὶ ἔκραξεν ἐν ἰσχυρᾷ φωνῇ λέγων· Ἔπεσεν, ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη. Jerome quoted “Babylon is fallen, is fallen” in reference to the downfall of John of Constantinople (Letter 113.1).
Hear, remnant(21:10)
10 The (unexpected) plural ἡμῖν probably refers to Israel. The reasons for changes from the Hebrew are unclear. The imperative “Listen” was added, possibly because the Hebrew sentence was going on too long without a verb. The first person pronoun “My” was removed from “downtrodden” and “son.” Possibly the ד of מְדֻשָׁת was read as a ר and transposed with the ש, so that a form of שאר was read. “My son of threshing” was changed to “pained,” and the first person subject and second person object “I reported to you” was changed to the third person subject and first person object “he reported to us.” Eusebius said the “forsaken and tortured” for verse 10 were not “those of the circumcision” but rather “those of the time of the apostles who regretted and lamented the evil of humanity” (Dem. ev. 2.3).
11 The addressee of the voice is singular in Πρὸς ἐμέ. The subject of καλεῖ is not yet specified. The addressee indicated by φυλάσσετε is now plural. G read חילה for לילה, making it ἐπάλξεις, the plural of ἔπαλξις, a defensive fortification.
12 The verb φυλάσσω is present, either indicative or subjunctive. The first person is unexpected; the Hebrew is a participle, so perhaps φυλάσσων was intended. Instead of the present indicative or imperative οἴκει of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the imperfect indicative ᾤκει. Probably the imperative was intended, from the Hebrew (plural) שׁבו, since this clause makes little sense with an indicative.
13 The time at which the sleep takes place is given in the genitive ἑσπέρας.
14 The water is for a meeting or encounter (συνάντησιν). The neuter ὕδωρ must be accusative, since the verb is second person plural. The plural οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες must be vocative, since the verbs are second person. The verb συναντᾶτε is cognate with the earlier noun συνάντησιν. This is the last finite verb in the paragraph; what follows is a string of phrases beginning with διὰ τό (providing the reason for fleeing), translating ומפני (describing that from which they are fleeing).
15 One of the things from which they flee are τοξευμάτων, arrows. These arrows are not “pulled” in the sense of a pulled tooth, which is removed, but in the sense of διατεταμένων of διατείνω, “extend,” which take place when a bow-string is pulled back.
1 G misread חזיון, “vision” as ציון, “Zion,” rendering it τῆς φάραγγος Σιών. Because Jerusalem is on a hill, it is surrounded by ravines.
2 Rahlfs divided the verses before μάταια; Swete and Ziegler after. The city in G is Zion; its people are creying out (βοώντων). The genitive μαχαίρας indicates the source or cause of the wounded. Basil Letter 44.2 and 46.1 quoted 22:2, weeping for souls.
3 As used also in 17:13 and 29:13, πόρρω is an adverb of relatively great distance.
A day of trouble, destruction, and trampling(20:4–14)
4 For the future κλαύσομαι the Hebrew has a prepositional phrase בבכי “in my weeping.” The verb κατισχύω normally involves being victorious by strength; the transitive use can mean “strengthen,” and this meaning is attested in the LXX (Deut 1:38). The infinitive παρακαλεῖν seems a bit out of place; it is unclear whether the με is the object of this infinitive, of κατισχύσητε, or both. Κατισχύσητε does not normally take an infinitive object, but neither is it usually transitive, for that matter. The noun σύντριμμα is cognate with the verb συντρίβω, which connotes breaking into pieces. Where Q reads λαοῦ, S, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read γένους. γένος normally means a genetically related person or group, in contrast to ἔθνος, which is more cultural. “Race” might be another adequate gloss. Matt 26:75 and Luke 22:62 share a phrase resembling πικρῶς κλαύσομαι. They both read καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἔξω ἔκλαυσεν πικρῶς. Chrysostom (Theod. laps. 1.3) quoted 22:4 as the words “of the prophet,” which he would use if someone tried to dissuade him from mourning. In Homily 16 on Romans 8:27 he attributed these words to Jeremiah, but to Isaiah in Homily 12 on Colossians 4:18 (that tears are blessed). Gregory of Nyssa (Funeral Oration on Meletius) quoted it when refusing to be consoled.
5 Τάραχος and ταραχῆς are synonyms.
6 A φαρέτρα holds arrows. Τhe nominative ἀναβάται ἄνθρωποι refers to the Elamites. In place of the accusative ἵππους (with S, B), A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has the dative ἵπποις. A παράταξις is a military formation of soldiers.
7 If the words ἔσονται αἱ ἐκλεκταὶ φάραγγές σου belong together, a nominative is missing; the meaning might be “Your select gullies will be,” or “Your gullies will be the elect,” or “The elect will be your gullies.” It might be possible to split this phrase in two, so that ἔσονται αἱ ἐκλεκταὶ is one sentence, and φάραγγές σου are the subject of the next sentence, despite the lack of article with φάραγγές σου. But in that case, the “elect” would be inexplicably feminine, whereas the Elamites are masculine. Silva simply ignored the ἔσονται. Ottley explained that the singular ἔσται would be expected as a translation of ויהן, but the plural was used because of the plural nominative immediately following.
In place of the future ἐμφράξουσι (spelled ἐμφράξουσιν in Q) found in Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the aorist subjunctive ἐμφράξωσι; ἐμφράσσω means to impair passage by filling the opening.
8 The horsemen not only will block up (ἐμφράξουσι) the gates, they will also ἀνακαλύψουσιν (future of ἀνακαλύπτω), uncover them. The reappearance of ἐκλεκτούς recalls 22:7.
9 ἄκρα normally means the peak or extreme point, but in a military contexts is used for a citadel at that high point of a town. The active indicative form εἴδοσαν is a mix of first and second aorist morphology for ὁράω / εἶδον. A κολυμβήθρα can refer to a reservoir or swimming pool.
10 That these Elamites tear down the houses is conveyed by the third person plural aorist of καθαιρέω. The result is indicated by the prepositional phrase εἰς ὀχύρωμα, which normally indicates a fortress. The beneficiary is indicated by the dative τῇ πόλει. The function of the genitive τοῦ τείχους is slightly harder to determine, but is probably the object that was turned into the fortress, as Silva translated, “to fortify the wall of the city.”
11 In verses 5-10, the verbs were all third person plural. In verse 11, the person changes to second person (still plural) ἐποιήσατε. Normally, ἀνὰ μέσον means “between” rather than “inside” or “within,” especially when used with δύο. The comparative form of the adverb ἔσω, ἐσώτερος can function as a preposition with the genitive, but “inside the old reservoir” would not make much sense. The feminine referent of αὐτήν most likely is the ancient reservoir.
12 κοπετόν implies mourning. The noun ξύρησις normally means shaving, a typical treatment of captives.
all virtue.” Chrysostom (Homily 40) noted that 1 Cor 15:32 uses Isaiah 22:13-14, who when “discoursing of certain insensible and reprobate persons made use of these words.” He called them “certain foolish ones” in Homily 72.5 on John. Athanasius (Ep. fest.2.7) quoted it support of his point, “those who are borne in the opposite direction have nothing better than to eat, and think their end is that they shall cease to be.” Those who love pleasures kill the soul with lusts (Ep. fest. 7.2).
14 The reappearance of uncovering (ἀνακεκαλυμμένα) recalls 22:8. The forgiveness is predicted (future of ἀφίημι) not to take place before death. Eusebius gave no indication that the forgiveness might take place thereafter. Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 2.1) condemned indulgent eating with the words, “For those that are absorbed in pots, and exquisitely prepared niceties of condiments, are they not plainly abject, earth-born, leading an ephemeral kind of life, as if they were not to live [hereafter]? Those the Holy Spirit, by Isaiah, denounces as wretched,” and quoted, “But they made mirth, killing calves, and sacrificing sheep, saying, Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” in condemning indulgent eating. He said, “your sin shall not be forgiven you till you die.” Jerome noted that God calls people to repentance, quoting 22:13-14 in Epist. 122.1 and 147.3. At the pronoun ὑμῖν and verb ἀποθάνητε, the grammatical person returns to second person.
15 The command to go is clearly addressed to the prophet, since it includes a command to go to the person for whom the prophecy is intended, so a past tense would be expected here. A παστοφόριον is the place for παστοφόροι, those who bring the παστός, which normally has something to do with brides, but sometimes powder; this place in the temple is mentioned by Josephus in J.W. 4.582 as τῶν παστοφορίων. It appears also in Esd A 9:1 and Jer 42:4. Eusebius provided the interpretations of “the Hebrew,” Symmachus, and Aquila (1.82). A ταμίας is a treasurer. The entry in BDAG discusses the accentuation of the imperative form εἰπόν; Ziegler has εἶπον.
16 The expression τί σοί appears to mean “what business do you have?” Somnas had apparently cut into stone (λατομέω) a tomb, μνημεῖον, which in older Greek could be anything by which something or someone is remembered; by the time of Christianity, it commonly referred to a tomb.
17 Three of the six instances of δή in G are together with Ἰδοὺ (3:1; 22:17; 33:7). The first-hands of both Q and S agree with B in reading the present tense ἐκβάλλει, but the future ἐκβαλεῖ of Q’s corrector, S corrector B, A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) fits better with the future of ἐκτρίβω (“rub out”). The man to which ἄνδρα refers is left implicit here, but the σου makes it clear that Somnas is intended. Swete and Ziegler divide the verse after καὶ τὸν στέφανόν σου τὸν ἔνδοξον; Rahlfs before. This phrase fits better with the preceding sentence, so I follow Swete and Ziegler. The crown held in high repute (ἔνδοξον) and robe are both objects of ἀφελεῖ.
18 The future verbs continue with ῥίπτω, “throw.” The country is described as ἀμέτρητον, beyond one’s ability to measure. The final fate of Somnas is given in the second person singular future (middle) of ἀποθνῄσκω. The combination of τίθημι with τινὰ εἴς τι is used to convey the transformation of one thing into another (BDAG s.v. τίθημι 5.a). The threats here are not necessarily chronological. Although one’s chariot (ἅρμα) and house might be ruined post-mortem, removal from one’s position can only happen during one’s lifetime. The phrase εἰς καταπάτημα recalls 5:5 (the vineyard); 7:23-25, and anticipates 28:18.
19 In the context of οἰκονομία, a managerial office, the meaning of στάσις is “position.” Luke 16:3 alludes to 22:19 with its οἰκονόμος who says to himself, τί ποιήσω, ὅτι ὁ κύριός μου ἀφαιρεῖται τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ; The second person singular future passive ἀφαιρεθήσῃ is also the reading of S correctors ca and cb3, Rahlfs and Ziegler; the original hand of S wrote ἀφρεθήσῃ; A and B have ἀφαιρεθήσει.
20 Swete spelled Ἐλιακίμ as Ἐλιακείμ. This Eliakim is mentioned in 36:3, 11, 22; 37:2, and also in 4 Kingdoms 18:18, 26, 37; 4 Kingdoms 19:2.
21 The recipient of the things taken in 22:17 and 19 is identified as Ἐλιακίμ.
22 The text of 22:22 is difficult.
Ottley noted, “Great varieties exist here, the question being one of clauses rather than words. Field and Ceriani are agreed in thinking that Q (with Γ 24 198 306 Syr.-hex.) preserves the true LXX. text, and that the fuller readings are Hexaplaric: B having admitted a portion of the intruding sentence, which duplicates the LXX. reading, a paraphrase. The original hand of א agrees with the Hebrew, that is, with the later Greek versions; and the correctors have been repeatedly at work” (1.31). Matt 16:19 quotes 22:22 as δώσω σοι τὰς κλεῖδας τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν δήσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν λύσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. The allusion substitutes the kingdom of heaven for the house of David, and the binding and loosing for the opening and closing. Rev 3:7 quotes 22:22 as: ὁ ἔχων τὴν κλεῖν Δαυείδ, ὁ ἀνοίγων καὶ οὐδεὶς κλείσει, καὶ κλείων καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀνοίξει. Origen’s Commentary on John 5.4 interprets Isaiah 22:22 in light of the parallel Revelation 3:7 as well as 5:1-5: no one should question the interpretation the Logos brings.
23 The place is secure in the sense that one can be confident of safety there. One can trust it. The father imagery continues from 22:21. The phrase ἔσται εἰς in G usually means “will become,” but it makes no sense for a leader to “become” a throne. Eusebius interpreted the story historically (1.82), but in a way that implicitly parallels Jesus with Eliakim on the basis of his gentleness. Eusebius said Eliakim would be trusted; people would be confident in him for their care (1.82). Eusebius claimed Eliakim symbolizes the Christian priesthood, replacing the Jewish, saying, τὸν δὲ Ἐλιακεὶμ θεοῦ ἀνάστασιν ἑρμηνευόμενον σύμβολον εἶναι τῆς νέας καὶ καινῆς ἱερωσύνης, ἣν ἡ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ἀνάστασις ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ καθ’ ὅλης τῆς οἰκουμένης συνεστήσατο. Cyril of Alexandria said “Eliakim” means “resurrection of God” (Comm. Isa. 22.10-14).
24 Evidently one Hebrew word gets a double translation here. The phrase καὶ ἔσται πεποιθώς appears to translate ותלו at the beginning of this verse, but the upcoming ἐπικρεμάμενοι (from ἐπικρεμαννύω) is a better match for the meaning of ותלו (“hang”).
The firmly established will be removed(22:25)
25 The verb στηρίζω, which typically means “strengthen” in the context of changing positions of authority, corresponds well to the English “establish.” Instead of τόπῳ (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has τῷ, matching 22:23.
1 The Oracle of Tyre (chapter 23) has been the subject of a mongraph-length study by Arie van der Kooij. Jesus in Matt 11:21 might expect this oracle to come to mind in his readers, when he says, οὐαί σοι, Χοραζίν, οὐαί σοι, Βηθσαϊδά· ὅτι εἰ ἐν Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἐγένοντο αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ γενόμεναι ἐν ὑμῖν, πάλαι ἂν ἐν σάκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ μετενόησαν. The present imperative Ὀλολύζετε recalls 14:31 and anticipates 23:14 precisely; the aorist is used at 10:10. The ships (πλοῖα) must be vocative in this case. first-hand of Sinaiticus()Q, , The subject of ἀπώλετο could be Tyre or Carthage; Carthage appears more likely because it the closer of the two, but Eusebius interpreted the destruction to refer only to Tyre. The subject of ἔρχονται is not specified, but would not be the ships of Carthage, since the form is not second but third person. The subject of the perfect passive singular ἦκται likely remains the same as that of ἀπώλετο, but could now be the land of the Kitienes. Despite what BDAG says, αἰχμάλωτος is an adjective with identical masculine and feminine
forms, modifying either Tyre or Carthage.
2 The nominative οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες is the subject of the perfect third person plural equative verb γεγόνασιν, and ὅμοιοι is the predicate nominative. The third nominative, μεταβόλοι, is in apposition to the inhabitants. The Hebrew is סחר. The genitive Φοινίκης most likely indicates the home of the traders, but (less probably) could indicate the place with which they trade. The Hebrew is צידון, Sidon. They are called διαπερῶντες, the participle of διαπεράω, which means move across. Athanasius (Ep. fest. 2.3) when admonishing his readers not to be like the evildoers who were careless and imitated the wicked, alluded to 23:2 as the prophet praying in the Spirit, “Ye are to me like merchant-men of Phoenicia,” as an example of the Word (the Son) trying to restrain his own people from such foolishness.
3 G translated ובמים רבים literally as ἐν ὕδατι πολλῷ, indicating that the sailors travel a great distance over the sea. Also in apposition to οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες is σπέρμα μεταβόλων. In Greek, they are traders from a family of traders, but in the MT, the word is שִׁחֹר; G confused sin and samek. The genitive absolute of ἄμητος, harvest, indicates either the time or the result, recalling 9:2, 17:5, 11; 18:4. This is the last occurrence of this word in G. The Hebrew behind μεταβόλοι is סחר again. The nominative has no verb here; the only finite verb in verses 2-3 is γεγόνασιν. Therefore a copular verb is supplied by translators. Ottley translated, “as when a harvest is gathered in, (are) the traffickers of the nations.” Silva translated, “The merchants of the nations are as when a harvest is being gathered in.” Van der Kooij translated, “As when the harvest is gathered in are the retailers of the nations.”
4 The vocative Σιδών is admonished with the aorist passive imperative of αἰσχύνω. The sea is an unexpected speaker here, but G is not creating the difficulty, only reproducing it, since εἶπεν ἡ θάλασσα is a literal translation of כי אמר ים, except that כי is ignored, and the article is added. In Hebrew, it is not the sea but the prophet who tells Sidon to be ashamed. The imperfect form of ὠδίνω (translating a qatal form, חלתי) could be first person singular or third person plural, but the parallel ἐθρεψα (aorist of τρέφω, “bring up”) establishes this as first person as well; Q’s margin’s and the other manuscripts (S, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the related ἐξέθρεψα (aorist of ἐκτρέφω, “bring up children”). The aorist form would be ὤδῑνα or ὠδίνησα (Ps 7:15). The aorist of τίκτω is in contrast to the preceding imperfect. The Greek ὑψόω is not normally used for raising children (fitting better with Q’s reading, ἐθρεψα); here it is a literal translation of רוממתי. Gregory Nazianzen (Oration 30.2), in discussing Wisdom personified in Proverbs 8:22, noted that the scripture often personifies lifeless objects, providing Isaiah 23:4 as an example. See also Gregory the Great, Pastor 3.28: “For Sidon is as it were brought to shame by the voice of the sea, when the life of him who is fortified, and as it were stedfast, is reproved by comparison with the life at those who are secular and fluctuating in this world.”
5 The neuter ἀκουστόν is nominative since the verb is γίνομαι; the neuter subject is impersonal. The subject of λήμψεται is ὀδύνη, a noun cognate with the verb ὤδινον in 23:4. The plural object αὐτούς is the Egyptians, despite the fact that Egypt was introduced as a singular noun. Hippolytus (Antichr. 52) quoted 23:4-5, saying these things shall be in the future and refer to the actions of the Antichrist, whose “first expedition will be against Tyre and Berytus, and the circumjacent territory. For by storming these cities first he will strike terror into the others.”
6 The addressees of ὀλολύξετε are the inhabitants; ἐνοικοῦντες is vocative. ὀλολύξετεAZieglerS and BhaveὀλολύζατεIn 20:6 the same expression ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ is used, to refer to an Egyptian island, translating האי הזה. Van der Kooij has argued that this demonstrative pronoun is very significant since it was added by G. He wrote, “It is to be noted that LXX offers a variation between vs 2 and vs 6: ἐν τῇ νήσῳ and ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ respectively; ΜΤ has in both verses the same reading (ישבי אי). It suggests that, unlike MT where both verses the same place is meant (Tyre; see chapter II), LXX vs 6 refers to a place different from the one envisaged in vs 2 which as we have seen is about the isle of the retailers of Phoenicia. The parallel wording of the text seems to point to Carthage: ‘Depart ye to Carthage, cry aloud, inhabitants of that isle.’” Van der Kooij changed the demonstrative from near (“this”) to far (“that”). I would argue that ταύτῃ is not an addition by G; it is rather a translation of the next Hebrew word, הזאת, which was doubly translated, once as ταύτῃ, and once as οὐχ αὕτη ἦν (οὐκ αὐτὴ ἦν in S). A similar double-translation appears in 21:6, where לך was understood both as an imperative and as a prepositional phrase; see the notes to 21:6. Therefore we do not have an intentional change of referent from Tyre to Carthage, nor did the early readers of the oracle of Tyre perceive a change of referent. Eusebius, Jerome, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, and Cyril of Alexandria did associate the prophecy in the first half of Isaiah 23 with a historical event in the past, but they held that it was Tyre, not Carthage, that was being led captive, and that this prophecy refers to the Babylonian capture of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar. If the translator
intended to convince his readers that the events prophesied had been fulfilled in his own day, he failed in his purpose.
7 The referent of οὐχ αὐτὴ is likely Carthage, but “this island” is also a grammatically possible referent. The addressees referred to by ὑμῶν are the inhabitants of “this” island.
Lord planned to disregard the esteemed(23:8-14)
8 The main topic is still Tyre rather than Carthage. The adjective ἥσσων, meaning “inferior,” translates the Hebrew המעטירה; G probably read the root as מעט, “be small.” The negator μή with indicative verbs indicates a question expecting a negative answer (Porter 1992, para. 18.2.1) Instead of the singular ἰσχύει of Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the plural ἰσχύουσιν. G translates ἔμποροι for סחר, which was earlier (23:2-3) translated by μεταβόλοι. Van der Kooij (1998a, 60) drew significance from this change, since ἔμποροι denotes wholesalers, whereas μεταβόλοι denotes retailers (see LSJ on μεταβολος). The evidence from Philo (Opif. 147), Josephus (Ant. 2.32; 20.34), and T. Zeb. (4:6) indicate that ἔμποροι are merchants who travel. The ἔνδοξοι have appeared in 5:14; and 10:33, and in the singular form in 12:4; 13:19; 22:18, 22:24. In 23:9 and 26:15 the connection with the earth will reoccur. The Hebrew here is נכבדי, like the second instance in 23:9. Rev 18:3 and 18:23 allude to 23:8, with their mention of οἱ ἔμποροι τῆς γῆς and οἱ ἔμποροί σου ἦσαν οἱ μεγιστᾶνες τῆς γῆς, respectively.
9 The question asked in 23:8 is answered here. Who planned this? Lord Sabaoth did. G has ἐνδόξων for the Hebrew צבי. Lord Sabaoth reverses the reputation of the esteemed (ἔνδοξον, translating נכבדי) with the aorist infinitive of ἀτιμάζω.
10 The reason for working the land is that it is no longer possible to make a living by overseas trade with Carthage. The imperatives are now singular (ἐργάζου), in contrast to those in 23:6. The conjunction joining the two clauses is γάρ, so καί must be acting adverbially.
11 The reappearance of ἰσχύει recalls 23:8, as does ἰσχύν. The present tense indicates the decline of Tyre had already taken place. The Masoretic form is qatal,
but might have been read as a participle. The participle ἡ παροξύνουσα modifies the feminine χείρ. Lord Sabaoth’s command is given in the aorist tense (of ἐντέλλω), and ἀπολέσαι, the aorist infinitive of ἀπόλλυμι.
12 Although cognate to ὕβρις, which we have been translating as “pride,” the normal meaning of ὑβρίζω, “abuse,” fits this context well. The phrase θυγατέρα Σιών recalls chapters 3 and 4. Instead of Zion, B has Sidon, as θυγατέρα Σειδῶνος; Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it θυγατέρα Σιδῶνος.
13 The feminine pronoun αὕτη leaves γῆ implicit. No Hebrew word corresponds to ἠρήμωται, the perfect passive of ἐρημόω. The perfects continue with πέπτωκεν, the perfect of πίπτω.
14 The imperative ὀλολύζετε and ἀπώλετο recall 23:1, and ὀχύρωμα recalls 22:10, where the wall was being made into a fortress for the city of David. Whereas 23:1 did not specify who had perished, here the fortress is specified.
5
15 The accusative ἔτη ἑβδομήκοντα indicates duration (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.4). The meaning of ὡς χρόνος βασιλέως is obscure, but it represents well the underlying Hebrew כימי מלך, “days of a king.” The Greek ὡς χρόνος ἀνθρώπου represents the Hebrew אחד “one,” into which G imported his understanding of the preceding “like the time of a king.”
Tyre will be like a song of a prostitute(23:15-16)[[@Bible:Isa 23:14-16]]
15 It seems odd for a city to be compared to a song, but ἔσται Τύρος ὡς ᾆσμα πόρνης is G’s attempt to render יהיה לצר כשׁירת הזונה, read as יהיה צר כשׁירת זונה, without the preposition ל and article.
16 The city is being addressed by the imperative λαβέ. The aorist imperative of ῥεμβεύω is synonymous with ῥεμβω; both refer to moving aimlessly. The singular πόλις is vocative. The participle in πόρνη ἐπιλελησμένη is vocative, from ἐπιλανθάνομαι, “forget.” The imperative of κιθαρίζω
is cognate with κιθάραν from earlier in this verse. The imperative of ᾄδω is cognate with ᾆσμα from 23:15. The purpose of the song is that there might be (aorist subjunctive of γίνομαι) a μνεία, something by which to remember. Ziegler noticed the intertextual connection to Prov 7:12 ῥεμβεύω and ῥέμβομαι in connection with a harlot (see Cook 2010). Aphrahat interpreted this prophecy as fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar; Dem. 5.9 says he “was the overshadowing Cherub; who destroyed the Prince of Tyre.” Eusebius (1.83) agreed that Babylonians are those that fulfilled this prophecy, desolating Tyre for rising up against Israel, quoting Psalm 83:6-7. Jerome (Letter 130.9) used 23:16 to argue that even during penitence the harp is appropriate: “sin stricken as she is, even Tyre is bidden to take up her harp and to do penance.”
17 Swete and Ziegler divide verses 16 and 17 after καὶ ἔσται μετὰ τὰ ἑβδομήκοντα ἔτη ἐπισκοπὴν ποιήσει ὁ θεὸς Τύρου, καὶ πάλιν ἀποκαταστήσεται εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον; Rahlfs divides them before. Q has a larger space prior to beginning these words than after, so my division agrees with Rahlfs. The ἐπισκοπή God makes is a visit in a supervisory role. The result is that it will be restored (from καθίστημι) to the way it was in ancient times, with the accusative τὸ ἀρχαῖον functioning adverbially. The ἐμπόριον refers to the place where merchants trade; there was such an “Exchange” in Athens. This noun recalls the ἔμποροι in 23:8, and indicates their restoration to even greater prosperity. Revelation 17:2 mentions βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς, which might allude to the phrase πάσαις βασιλείαις τῆς οἰκουμένης of Isa 23:17. The likelihood that this is the intention of the seer is confirmed by Rev 18:3, which has both βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς and οἱ ἔμποροι τῆς γῆς from 23:8. In its entirety it reads ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς πέπωκαν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖςτῆς γῆς μετʼ αὐτῆς ἐπόρνευσαν καὶ οἱ ἔμποροι τῆςγῆς ἐκ τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ στρήνους αὐτῆς ἐπλούτησαν.
18 A third noun ἐμπορία is cognate with ἐμπόριον and ἔμποροι, referring to the activity in which merchants, ἔμποροι, engage. The noun μισθός normally applies to the wages of an individual, but can refer to recompense of any kind. Two nominative nouns are the subject of ἔσται, but they are differing genders. The predicate nominative is a neuter singular adjective ἅγιον. The phrase τῷ Κυρίῳ is one of the rare instances in which the article appears with Lord. Both οὐκ and ἀλλά are followed by the dative case, confirming they indicate a contrasting pair. The subject of συναχθήσεται is now πᾶσα ἡ ἐμπορία αὐτῆς. The purpose of the collected commerce is to fill (aorist passive infinitive of ἐμπίπλημι) the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that (εἰς indicating purpose or result) there will be a συμβολή, which normally expresses some kind of coming together. In the plural, it can specifically mean “contribution,” which fits this context, despite the singular form. There is a neuter noun μνημόσυνον, but μνημόσυνος is also an adjective, although the feminine form follows the first declension. Here we have the second declension, so μνημόσυνον cannot be modifying συμβολήν. Instead, two nouns are in apposition. In Dem. 21.6 Aphrahat wrote, “Now we see that Tyre was inhabited, and was opulent after she had wandered seventy years, and after she had received the reward of her harlotries and after she had committed fornication with all kingdoms. And she took the harp, and played it sweetly, and multiplied her music.”
1 Cunha rejected the suggestion that another lexeme is used other than καταφθείρει (“ruins”) to translate the Hebrew participle בוקק (de Angelo Cunha 2014). It is translated with the present tense rather than the future καταφθερεῖ. The tenses then shift to the future ἐρημώσει, although the Hebrew is still a participle ובולקה. The verb ἀνακαλύψει recalls 20:4; 22:8-9, 14. The subject is still Lord. The referent of αὐτῆς is the inhabited world. The future tense continues with διασπερεῖ, from διασπείρω, “scatter.”
2 A series of contrasting pairs of categories of people are said to be the same (the lady, κυρία, like the θεράπαινα, female slave), indicating that the desolation will be indiscriminate. Gregory Nazianzen quoted 24:2 in Oration 2.82: “Nor indeed is there any distinction between the state of the people and that of the priesthood: but it seems to me to be a simple fulfilment of the ancient curse, ‘As with the people so with the priest.’” Jerome, Letter 128.4 quoted the same verse to make the point that priests should care for their flock.
3 Both words in the phrase φθορᾷ φθαρήσεται are cognate with καταφθείρει in 24:1. Two cognate datives occur in this verse: φθορᾷ and προνομῇ.
4 Both πενθέω and ὀλολύζω (24:11) are responses to sadness; the difference is that the intransitive use of πενθέω refers to one’s experience (grieving), and ὀλολύζω refers to a vocal expression (wailing). The expectation set up in 24:1 is fulfilled by ἐφθάρη. The condemnation (including that of 24:2) is against ὑψηλοί, those with high status. Cunha argued that the reason Greek text is shorter than the MT is not because of a shorter Vorlage but because G deliberately abbreviated his text (de Angelo Cunha 2014).
5 The subject of ἠνόμησεν (aorist of ἀνομέω) is not personal; it is the land. Instead of παρέβησαν, (from παραβαίνω, the more common word for transgressing the law), S and B have παρήλθοσαν, (from παρέρχομαι). In parallel with this transgression is the change (aorist of ἀλλάσσω) of the commandments.
Cheer has ceased(24:6-10)[[@Bible:Isa 24:1-3]]
6 Not the particle ἄρα, but the noun ἀρά “curse” translates
7 With πενθήσει the subjects again become impersonal: “wine,” and “vine.”
8 Cognate with the verb for cheering in the preceding verse is εὐφροσύνη. The egotism conveyed by αὐθάδεια includes arrogance and selfishness. Revelation 18:22 alludes to Isa 24:8 with its declaration of the end of musical delights: καὶ φωνὴκιθαρῳδῶν καὶ μουσικῶν καὶ αὐλητῶν καὶ σαλπιστῶν οὐ μὴ ἀκουσθῇ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι
9 The reversal of fortunes results in their shame, expressed by the aorist passive of αἰσχύνω. G read בשיר as בשו, translating as ᾐσχύνθησαν. In this context, the form ἔπιον must be third person plural. Hebrew שכר is transliterated as σίκερα, an alcoholic drink other than wine. Because the word is transliterated rather than translated into Greek, it is appropriate to do the same in the English translation.
10 The expectation set up by 24:1’s ἐρημώσει αὐτήν is fulfilled in ἠρημώθη. The awkwardness of κλείσει οἰκίαν (οἰκίας in Q) in Greek comes from the Hebrew, which in the MT reads סגר כל בית “close every house.” In G, the “every” is moved to modify “city.” The purpose is expressed by τοῦ μὴ εἰσελθεῖν: so that the house cannot be entered.
11 The ubiquity of the desolation is expressed by the adverb πανταχῇ, “everywhere.” Some verbal repetition from 24:8 occurs in πέπαυται. The perfect tense reflects the Hebrew qatal form.
12 The reappearance of καταλειφθήσονται recalls 24:6. The future form, with καί indicates G read ונשׁאר, whereas the MT has only נשׁאר. Both καταλείπω and ἐγκαταλείπω appear together. Of the two, καταλείπω is the more common in G, appearing 45 times, in contrast to 17 times for ἐγκαταλείπω. In G’s usage, καταλείπω is used for the general sense of leaving, and is commonly used in the passive voice to refer to what is left behind, left over, or remaining. In contrast, G uses ἐγκαταλείπω for more intentional abandonment or forsaking, as in 1:4, 41:1, 17 (Isa 1:9 is the single exception). Although λείπω does not occur in G in uncompounded form, other compounds of λείπω include ἐκλείπω for discontinuation (ceasing or failing, e.g., 15:6, 19:5, 6, 13; 38:12, 14), διαλείπω for relenting (5:14), ἀπολείπω for abandoning (55:7), and ὑπολείπω for remaining (4:3).
13 The referent of ταῦτα πάντα is all the preceding future clauses.
Remnant cheered by Lord’s glory(24:13-15)[[@Bible:Isa 24:11-15]]
13 Instead of the future passive καλαμήσηται of Q, B, A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the present passive καλαμᾶται. The vocabulary recalls 3:12, where the addressees were “gleaned.” Swete accented τρύγητος as τρυγητός.
14 The meaning of φωνῇ βοήσονται, the reading of Q, S, A, Rahlfs, and Ziegler, is the same as the reading of B, which is βοῇ φωνήσουσιν. The recurring vocabulary καταλειφθέντες recalls the cities in 24:12. The cessation of cheer from 24:7-10 is reversed by εὐφρανθήσονται. The dative τῇ δόξῃ provides the reason for the cheer. Normally ταράσσω carries an undesriable connotation: that it is stirred up and confused, disturbed, agitated. Since in ταραχθήσεται τὸ ὕδωρ τῆς θαλάσσης the sea is experiencing the emotion opposite from the remnant, it seems that in this verse the sea is presented as the enemy of God’s people.
15 The logical connection created by διὰ τοῦτο makes little sense. Why should the troubling of the sea cause Lord’s glory to be in the sea’s islands? G misunderstood the imperative כבדו “glorify” as a noun “glory,” at least in the first clause of this verse. In the second clause, G has double-translated כבדו, this time with a meaning that better fits the preceding verse: ἔνδοξον ἔσται, “will be glorified.”
16 Rahlfs placed Κύριε ὁ θεὸς Ἰσραήλ in verse 15; Swete and Ziegler put them in verse 16. In Q there is a space before these words, agreeing with Swete and Ziegler. Wings (πτερύγων) appeared in 6:2. The Vulgate version of 24:16, “My secret is for Me and for Mine,” is quoted by Jerome in Epist. 48.13 and Theodoret, in Ecclesiastical History 1.3.
17 The παγίς coming upon those inhabiting the land is picked up by Luke 21:35:ὡς παγίς· ἐπεισελεύσεται γὰρ ἐπὶ πάντας τοὺς καθημένους ἐπὶ πρόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς. Rev 8:13 does the same, but its vocabulary for the storm is not παγίς: Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἤκουσα ἑνὸς ἀετοῦ πετομένου ἐν μεσουρανήματι λέγοντος φωνῇ μεγάλῃ· οὐαὶ οὐαὶ οὐαὶ τοὺς κατοικοῦνταςἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν φωνῶν τῆς σάλπιγγος τῶν τριῶν ἀγγέλων τῶν μελλόντων σαλπίζειν.
19 The noun ἀπορίᾳ and its cognate verb convey being at a loss, experiencing puzzlement, and uncertainty. Brenton translated it as “perplex,” which I follow. Luke 21:25 alludes to the perplexity of Isa 24:19 in the face of natural calamities: Καὶ ἔσονται σημεῖα ἐν ἡλίῳ καὶ σελήνῃ καὶ ἄστροις, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς συνοχὴ ἐθνῶν ἐν ἀπορίᾳ ἤχους θαλάσσης καὶ σάλου. Chrysostom, Theod. laps. 1.12 paraphrased 24:19-22.20 The ὀπωροφυλάκιον recalls 1:8. The image of the ὀπωροφυλάκιον appears in Testament of Joseph 19.7 in the A text (19.12) (see also Isa 1:8) The καί between the participles ὁ μεθύων and κραιπαλῶν indicates that the simile has come to an end, and the verbs πεσεῖται and ἀναστῆναι have as their subject ἡ γῆ. The infinitive ἀναστῆναι in this context refers to the effort of the drunkard to rise after falling, hence the English “to get up.” Lord will reign in Jerusalem(24:21-23)[[@Bible:Isa 24:21-23]]
21 Cunha argued that G omitted the Hebrew והיה ביום ההוא deliberately (de Angelo Cunha 2014). The phrase τὸνκόσμοντοῦοὐρανοῦ refers to not the “world” but the “order”of the sky. The “kings of the land” are alluded to in Rev 6:15 and Rev 17:18. Rev 6:15 has Καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖςτῆςγῆς καὶ οἱ μεγιστᾶνες καὶ οἱ χιλίαρχοι καὶ οἱ πλούσιοι καὶ οἱ ἰσχυροὶ καὶ πᾶς δοῦλος καὶ ἐλεύθερος ἔκρυψαν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰς τὰς πέτρας τῶν ὀρέων. Rev 17:18 has καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἣν εἶδες ἔστιν ἡ πόλις ἡ μεγάλη ἡ ἔχουσα βασιλείαν ἐπὶτῶν βασιλέων τῆςγῆς. Jerome referred to this verse in Pelag. 2.24.
22 The plural συνάξουσιν and ἀποκλείσουσιν have no explicit subject. The kings of the land from verse 21 could be the subject, or they could be the object. Eusebius ignored the plural endings of the verbs and said the hand of God is the one doing the gathering and imprisoning. The usual English glosses for the G’s ἐπισκοπή are misleading. It not carry the positive connotations of “visitation,” which in modern English is a friendly social activity, or “watching over” which is a benevolent protective activity. Instead, “examination” or “inspection” convey the meaning of the Greek better. In G’s usage, ἐπισκοπή is a thing to be dreaded. In 10:3 it describes the day of affliction; in 23:16 Tyre is examined; in 29:6, the visitation comes with thunder and quaking.
23 Rev 4:4 alludes to the elders of Isa 24:23 as follows: Καὶ κυκλόθεν τοῦ θρόνου θρόνους εἴκοσι τέσσαρες, καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς θρόνους εἴκοσι τέσσαρας πρεσβυτέρους καθημένους περιβεβλημένους ἐν ἱματίοις λευκοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν στεφάνους χρυσοῦς. Rev 21:23 alludes to the glorification of Lord without the moon and sun: καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ λύχνος αὐτῆς τὸ ἀρνίον.
1 The usual translation of אמן, “amen” in the LXX is γένοιτο (especially in Deut 27 and the Psalms) which is what we find here. However, the masoretes pointed this noun not as “amen” but as אֹמֶן. The other instance of אמן in Isaiah is in 65:16, where it is rendered ἀληθινόν. The address to God does not end here, since the second person verbs continue. Methodius (Oration Concerning Simeon and Anna 6) prayed “O Lord my God, I will glorify Thee, I will praise Thy name; for Thou hast done wonderful things; Thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth” from 25:1.
2 The transformation of one thing into another is expressed by τίθηναι τι εἰς τι in the phrase ἔθηκας πόλις εἰς χῶμα. The city is transformed into χῶμα, which normally refers to earthworks; it becomes a pile of soil. The adjective ὀχυρός “strong” is often used as a military term; in this context it means “secure.” The infinitive τοῦ πεσεῖν in this case conveys the result rather than (as is usual) purpose. The construction τὸν αἰῶναis comprehensible as an adverbial accusative: “forever.”
3 The Hebrew על כן receives its typical treatment, as διὰ τοῦτο.4 The second person singular aorist middle indicative of γίνομαι indicates what Lord has become. The second predicate nominative σκέπη “shelter” is parallel to βοηθός; it too has ἐγένου as its verb. Those for whom Lord is a shelter are those ἀθυμήσασιν, i.e., those lacking θυμός, passion. Their lack of passion is attributable to ἔνδεια, which signifies deficiency. 2 Thess 3:2 has a verbal allusion to Isa 25:4’s rescuing from evil people: καὶ ἵνα ῥυσθῶμεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων· οὐ γὰρ πάντων ἡ πίστις.5 The Hebrew ציון means “parched land,” but G understandably took it as the place name Σιών. Ambrose Fid. 3.5.40 and John Cassian Collat. 2.13.12 both quote from this paragraph. Lord will act on this mountain toward all nations(25:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 25:5-7]]
6 The dative πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν could express benefit “for” or detriment “against.” The mountain referenced by ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τοῦτο is presumably Zion, with the implication that the oracle was delivered at Jerusalem. The prepositional phrase without a preceding article indicates where the action will take place, not where the nations are located. Cyril of Jerusalem (Lecture 21.7) interpreted the “mountain” as the Church, and the ointment is mystically the Unction (anointing on the forehead). 1 Enoch 10:18-19 alludes to the abundance of wine after the day of judgement.
7 Although Rahlfs places χρίσονται μύρον at the end of verse 6, Swete and Ziegler have in verse 7. The middle of χρίω here implies self-anointing. The addressee of the imperative παράδος is not obvious, but presumably is the prophet. Although in G, the preposition ἐπί (when it is not locative) tends to indicate opposition rather than benefit (1:25; 2:4, 12-16; 5:25; 7:1, 17; 8:7, 21; 9:4, 8, 11-12, 17. 21; 10:4, 12, 24-26; 11:14-15; 14:4, 8, 16, 26), the favourable meaning is also attested (8:14, 17; 9:6-7; 10:21; 11:2, 10; 12:2; 14:30; 15:2); the English “toward” was chosen in order to not import a positive or negative attitude, since in this context (see verse 6) the nations are happy at Lord’s treatment. Rufinus wrote, “First, therefore, hear how this very thing is prophetically declared by Isaiah, that the Jews, to whom the Prophets had foretold these things, would not believe, but that they who had never heard them from the Prophets, would believe them.… Moreover, this same Isaiah foretells that, while those who were engaged in the study of the Law from childhood to old age believed not, to the Gentiles every mystery should be transferred,” and quoted 25:6-7 in support, with its “deliver all these things to the nations” (παράδος πάντα ταῦτα τοῖς ἔθνεσιν) (Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed 19).
8 Although G understood המות, death, to be the subject of the verb rather than the object (Κατέπιεν ὁ θάνατος ἰσχύσας), Paul in 1 Cor 15:54 understood death to be the object, which matches the Hebrew. The aorist participle indicates that since death had become strong, it was able to swallow. Most early
interpreters of G took this verse to refer to death’s struggle to become victorious. In this context, death fails, since tears, the sign of mourning, will be no more. The verb ἀφεῖλεν is used for the removal of both the tears and the reproach of the people. Because 25:8 is quoted in the New Testament, it gets relatively more attention than the rest of this chapter. 1 Cor 15:54 has Κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος εἰς νῖκος. Revelation 20:14 also personifies death, but that is the extent of the allusion. The sentiment there, that death is itself consumed, is a closer match to 1 Cor 15:54. Revelation 7:17 has καὶ ἐξαλείψει ὁ θεὸς πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν; Rev 21:4 has the same, but without ὁ θεός. Irenaeus (Haer. 5.12.1) quoted 25:8 in support of his claim that the flesh is capable of incorruption, when life drives out death. Tertullian, Marc. 5.10 wrote of death’s “struggle,” alluding to the ἰσχύσας of 25:8. Origen (Princ. 2.3.2) likewise connected 25:8 with 1 Cor 15:53-56, speaking of the “strength” of sin, which is the law. In Comm. Matt. 12.35, Origen collected scriptural references to death, and wrote: “Now in these passages it appears to me that it is one thing to taste of death, but another thing to see death, and another thing for it to come upon some, and that a fourth thing, different from the aforesaid, is signified by the words, ‘Death becoming mighty has swallowed them up,’ and a fifth thing, different from these, by the words, Death and Hades follow them.” Theodoret of Cyrrhus (Counter-statement Against 10) quoted 25:8 in reference to Jesus’ tears, showing that Jesus could suffer. Athanasius (C. Ar. 2 15.16) connected the raising of the ancient dead at Jesus’ death with 25:8. Gregory of Nyssa said childbirth no longer carries sorrow, quoting 25:8.
9 Irenaeus (Haer. 4.9.2) interpreted 25:9 in reference to Christ, in whom trust was placed.
10 The expression ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τοῦτο recalls 25:6. Becking identified a similar proverb in the Mari letters (18th C BCE), “beneath straw water runs,” and argued that each of the two sayings (Akkadian and Hebrew) can shed light on the other (Becking 2010).
The sudden introduction of a specific nation Μωαβῖτις comes with no warning or foreshadowing. Moab is to be trampled like ἅλων (which can refer to a threshing floor or to the grain on such a floor) by means of (dative) ἁμάξαις, wagons.
11 The future is used of ἀνίημι, which usually means releasing restrictions, letting go. Here it translates פָּרַשׂ, “spread.” The image of stretching out one’s hands recurs in 65:2. The subject cannot be the feminine Moab because αὐτοῦ indicates that the owner of the hands is masculine. Rather, the subject is unspecified. Likewise the object of ἐταπείνωσεν is not given, and must be inferred from the upcoming ταπεινώσει, which has as object τὴνὕβριναὐτοῦ. The reading of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), ἃ, refers to things as yet unspecified; S has ᾗ, referring to the insolence.
12 The καταφύγη, a place of refuge, is brought down to the ἔδαφος, which refers to a bottom surface, i.e., “floor,” or “ground.”
1 See BDAG s.v. τίθημι ⑤ⓐβ regarding θήσει with double accusatives used for making something into something. Instead of the genitive ἡμῶν (Q, followed by Rahlfs), S and A have the dative ἡμῖν; B (followed by Ziegler) lacks this pronoun. According to Q’s reading, he makes the wall “our” deliverance; in S, the deliverance is for our benefit.
We hoped on Lord(26:2-10)[[@Bible:Isa 26:1-6]]
3 Justin Martyr (Dial. 24) referred to “λαὸς φυλάσσων πίστιν, ἀντιλαμβανόμενος ἀληθείας, καὶ φυλάσσων εἰρήνην,” using the language of 26:2-3.
4 Third Enoch 42.5 refers to the Lord as “the everlasting Rock,” following the Hebrew צור rather than the Greek ὁ μέγας.
6 In G, the root πατέωappears most frequently in chapters 25 and 26. It translates the roots רמס (5 times),הלך, דרך, בוס (3 times each), דושׁ (twice), and six other roots. With the exception of בוס , which is never translated as simple πατέω, there is no difference between the πατέω and καταπατέω in Isaiah. Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. Bas. 42.8) associated the “meek” of 26:6 with those who acknowledge the Trinity, in contrast to the Arians.
7 Raurell noted that G shifts the credit for the way of the righteous from God over to the pious themselves. He pointed out that παρασκευάζειν is rarely used in the other books of the LXX. In Jeremiah, it means preparation for war (1982, 70).
8 As Raurell noted, this judgement as a positive thing that the righteous need not fear, linking the sentiment to 28:17, 21 (1982, 71).
9 Wido van Peursen noted that although Isa 26:9-19 was included in the Syriac Odes because of the Greek tradition, the text itself is from the Peshitta. Peursen identified three rescensions made since this Ode was originally taken from the Peshitta: one early and one late West Syriac rescension and a Melkite recension. These were influenced by the Greek text (van Peursen 2010).
10 Origen (Comm. Jo. 2.20) quoted 26:9 in an explanation of what “the light of men” might be. Athanasius quoted the same verse to support his point that people should never leave off seeking God.
11 Heb 10:27 alludes to Isa 26:11 in the words, φοβερὰ δέ τις ἐκδοχὴ κρίσεως καὶπυρὸς ζῆλος ἐσθίειν μέλλοντος τοὺςὑπεναντίους.Cyprian (Test. 2.4) referred to this verse in his argument that Christ is the hand and arm of God.
13 2 Timothy 2:19 alludes to Isa 26:13, with the words, ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν, ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην· ἔγνω κύριος τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ, καί· ἀποστήτω ἀπὸ ἀδικίας πᾶς ὁ ὀνομάζων τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου.
14 In the absence of an appropriate accusative object, ἀναστήσωσιν would normally be understood as intransitive “rise.” But probably because of the context of healers and death, Eusebius took the healers to be restoring (raising) to life (1.87).
15 The direct address to Lord twice uses an imperative πρόσθες. Eusebius objected to the “evils” that God is supposed to increase according to the Old Greek, and preferred the rendering of all the other versions and “the Hebrew.”
I remembered Lord in distress(26:16-18)[[@Bible:Isa 26:1-6]]
18 Rahlfs put διὰ τὸν φόβον σου, κύριε in verse 17; Swete and Ziegler have them in verse 18. The previous line in Q extends farther than typical before breaking (the -ου in σου would normally be on the next line); for this reason, my versification here agrees with Swete and Ziegler. Archelaus (The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes) may allude to 26:18.
19 Two synonymous verbs are used for the resurrection: ἀναστήσονταιand ἐγερθήσονται, one active (intransitive), and the other passive. G regularly renders קום with ἀνίστημι; ἐγείρω is much less common, used once each for four different Hebrew roots. Here the root is קיץ, which also appears in 29:8 for resurrection (G uses ἐξανίστημι), and in the rest of the Greek scriptures is typically translated as ἐξεγείρω. Matthew 11:5 and Luke 7:22 allude to 26:19; they use it as one of the identifying signs of the one who was to come. Matthew’s version has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke differs only in the omission of several instances of καί. Matthew later alluded to the same prophecy in Matt 27:52, καὶτὰ μνημεῖα ἀνεῴχθησαν καὶ πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθησαν. Luke 7:22 has πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάννῃ ἃ εἴδετε καὶ ἠκούσατε· τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. John 5:28 alludes to a phrase verbatim: ἔρχεται ὥρα ἐν ᾗ πάντες οἱἐντοῖςμνημείοις ἀκούσουσιν τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ. The verse is hugely popular among the church fathers.
20 The rarer βαδίζω is used for הלך rather than the usual πορεύομαι. The four times βαδίζω does appear in G, they all translate הלך. Although the imperative ἀποκρύβηθι is morphologically passive,rendering it in English as “be hidden” overtranslates the passive sense. The expressionὅσονὅσον is given by LEH as “in a very little while.” Ottley explained, “the expression ὅσον ὅσον is rare: it occurs in Heb 10:37, possibly a reference to this passage: see Bp Westcott’s note in his Comm. on the Epistle. It is also found, Aristophanes Vespae 213, ὅσον ὅσον στίλην, and in the Anthology (οὐδʼ ὅσον ὅσσον, Philet. ap. Stobaeus, I. 104, 12).” Isa 26:20 is alluded to in Matt 6:6 and Heb 10:37. Matthew has very similar wording and inflection, but describes a different situation: σὺ δὲ ὅταν προσεύχῃ, εἴσελθεεἰςτὸ ταμεῖόν σου καὶ κλείσας τὴνθύρανσου πρόσευξαι τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ· καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι. As Westcott noted, Heb 10:37 uses the rare expression from Isa 26:29 in the context of Christ’s return: ἔτι γὰρ μικρὸν ὅσον ὅσον, ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἥξει καὶ οὐ χρονίσει. Isaiah 26:20 is very popular among the church fathers. Athanasius (Apol. Const. 34) defended his silence with the words from 26:20, “Hide thyself for a little moment, until the wrath of the Lord be overpast.”
1 Revelation twice uses imagery from Isa 27:1. Rev 12:3 mentions the dragon (καὶ ὤφθη ἄλλο σημεῖον ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, καὶ ἰδοὺ δράκων μέγας πυρρὸς ἔχων κεφαλὰς ἑπτὰ καὶ κέρατα δέκα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτοῦ ἑπτὰ διαδήματα), and in Rev 13:1, he comes from the sea (Καὶ εἶδον ἐκ τῆς θαλάσσης θηρίον ἀναβαῖνον, ἔχον κέρατα δέκα καὶ κεφαλὰς ἑπτὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν κεράτων αὐτοῦ δέκα διαδήματα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτοῦ ὀνόμα[τα] βλασφημίας).
2 Eusebius identified the vineyard with that of chapter 5, and said it was beautiful and it was a desire (ἦν οὖν ποτε καλὸς οὗτος καὶ ἐπιθύμημα ἦν, 1.90). He made no comment on the puzzling infinitive ἐξάρχειν κατʼ αὐτῆς (Q reads αὐτοῦ), which has to do with leading, typically in the context of singing, (1 Kingdoms 18:7; 21:12; Exod 15:21), which does not make much sense in this context. Muraoka (GELS) indicated that here the phrase means “to act as a leader concerning
(or against) it.” Ottley supplied much in order to make a sensible translation, “In that day (shall there be) a fair vineyard; (there is) a desire to begin (a song) upon her.”
4 The letter η makes the most sense if taken as a relative pronoun. οὐκἔστινἣοὐκἐπελάβετοαὐτῆς would mean there is none which (feminine nominative) did not seize it (feminine genitive). Both feminine pronouns would most reasonably refer to cities. Although the grammatical person is first person in both the question and the clause that follows, because the same verb τίθημι is used with the first person first as object then as subject, apparently a dialogue is taking place, with the prophet asking the question, and Lord answering, then the prophet speaking again about Lord. The object of ἠθέτηκααὐτήν, the feminine singular object that is set could be a city, but the closer feminine singular is the stalk, especially since it too is an object of τίθημι. Becauseπολεμίαν is not a noun but a feminine adjective, and the noun it modifies is not explicit, it must describe something feminine implicitly as enemy. Perhaps “land” is implied, but also πόλιςwould be an appropriate closest match.An alternate translation could be, “I set it up of account of this hostile [land].”
6 The οἰκουμένη appears in G in two clusters: chapters 10-14 and 23-27.
7 The rhetorical question Μὴὡςαὐτὸςἐπάταξεν, καὶαὐτὸςοὕτωςπληγήσεται expects a negative answer (Porter 1992, sec. 18.2.1).The preceding αὐτόςis emphatic, so the question asks if the beater himself will be beaten (πληγήσεται is the passive where ἐπάταξεν is active).
8 Although in the other instances in Isaiah μελετάω tends to be something audible, that meaning is not as clear here. Eusebius took it to be something obsessive, which would make sense if it is like chanting a mantra. See the commentary on 38:14. Although πνεῦμα could be translated as “wind,” I translate “spirit” because Eusebius spoke of this πνεῦμα inside the unfaithful Gentiles (1.90).
9 Romans 11:27 quotes καὶ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρʼ ἐμοῦ διαθήκη, ὅταν ἀφέλωμαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν, pluralizing G. There is semantic overlap between βωμός and θυσιαστήριον. They appear in parallel in Hosea 10:8; Sirach 50:11, 14, and after destroying the βωμούς in 2Macc 10:2, they built ἕτερον θυσιαστήριον.The children of Jacob who are traversing the world are, according to Eusebius, the apostles, who brought the possibility of removal of sin. Eusebius located the time of the altar-breaking after this blessing (εὐλογία), when idolatry was replaced with God-fearing throughout the empire. The blessing is indicated by two clauses introduced by ὅταν. The two subsequent clauses introduced by καίexpress further attendant circumstances.
The flock will be neglected(27:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
10 Because ποίμνιον normally refers to a group of sheep, it is surprising to read that a ποίμνιον might be inhabited, as τὸκατοικούμενονποίμνιον states. Brenton translated, “the flock that dwelt there,” and Ottley wrote, “the fold that is inhabited.” But Plato, Leges 683a (ὀρθῶς ἔφατε κατοικεῖσθαι καὶ Κρήτην ὡς ἀδελφοῖς νόμοις) indicates that the passive of κατοικέω is to refer to the administration or governance of a state.
The creator will not show mercy(27:11)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
11 The words קצירה תשׁברנה have no equivalent in G.
Gather the sons of Israel(27:12)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
12 G rendered the imperfect תלקטו with the imperative συναγάγετε.
1 Willem Beuken identified verbal and ideological connections between the Isaianic Apocalypse and the chapters that follow. He pointed to certain phrases that are shared between the two sections, and noted that in Isaiah 28-31 Jerusalem experiences the specific judgement described in Isaiah 24-27 (Beuken 2010). The adjective παχύς can be used for fat (Hippocrates, Aph. 3.25), and when describing land, its fertility can be meant (Xenophon, Oec. 17.8). But more prototypically it expresses thickness and substance (Aristophanes, Lys. 25-27).
3 Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. 42.11) mentioned the hirelings of Ephraim and crown of insolence on the occasion of his resignation as bishop.
4 καταπίνω can be used of both liquids and solids. This verb is used in 1 Peter 5:8 for the lion who seeks whom he may devour.
5 The eschatological crown of the righteous (also in 62:3 and Ezek 28:12) is developed in 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Tim 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pet 5:4; Rev 2:10; 3:11. It is picked up in 1QS 4:7; 1QHa, 2 Bar 15:8, and Gk. Apoc. Ezra 6.17.
6 Because the infinitive ἀνελεῖν is the complement of κωλύων, my translation uses the noun “destruction.”
7 The accusative article on σίκερα (rather than genitive) indicates that the drink is not the means but the cause or reason for the wandering.The Epistle of Pope Anterus quoted 28:7 “They have erred through wine; they have not known the seer; they have been ignorant of judgment” in reference to those who think bishops may change cities to suit themselves.
8 The adverb ἕνεκενfunctions as a preposition with the genitive to indicate that the reason for the curse is πλεονεξία.Mishnah Avot 3.5 quotes 28:8: “For all tables are full of vomit, filthiness without God.”
9 Third Enoch 48C.12 quotes 28:9, “The virtuous man escapes misfortune, the wicked man incurs it instead,” in support of the claim that if a man repents, God’s punishment is transferred to another wicked man.
10 The Hebrew קו לקו seems to be behind Irenaeus’ statement (Haer. 1.24.5) that some “affirm that the barbarous name in which the Saviour ascended and descended, is Caulacau.” This name is also mentioned in Hippolytus Refutation of All Heresies 5.10.
11 Paul alluded to Isa 28:11-12 in 1 Cor 14:21: ἐν τῷ νόμῳ γέγραπται ὅτι Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ, καὶ οὐδʼ οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου, λέγει κύριος. The introductory formula might imply Paul intended to quote verbatim, but what he wrote is a paraphrase adapted to his context. The subject changes from first person singular (Lord) in Isaiah, to third person plural. The other languages spoken are mentioned by Apostolic Constitutions 8.1.
12 Because ἀνάπαυμα is in parallel with another location (σύντριμμα), my translation has “resting-place” rather than “rest.” Isa 28:12 may be what Jesus had in mind in Matt 11:29, ἄρατε τὸν ζυγόν μου ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς καὶ μάθετε ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ, ὅτι πραΰς εἰμι καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, καὶ εὑρήσετε ἀνάπαυσιν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑμῶν.
13 Both Brenton and Ottley also left ἔτι μικρὸν ἔτι μικρόν as the literal “yet a little, yet a little,” rather than paraphrasing to its evident meaning, “in a little while.”Although εἰςτὰὀπίσωoften corresponds to “behind” in English, the expression “fall behind” carries connotations in the sense of not keeping up with the rest of the pack, connotations that the Greek does not. Therefore “fall backward”is the preferable translation here.
15 The plural of συνθήκη is typically used for a treaty (between individuals or states) because of the plural articles of agreement. That meaning of διαθήκη is also attested in the Greco-Roman world (and is firmly at home in the biblical literature), but more commonly διαθήκη has to do with the disposition of property.
16 LEH suggeststhe phrase λίθονἀκρογωνιαῖον means “cornerstone,”and thattogether ἀκρογωνιαῖονπολυτελῆ occurs several times in the OG (Ziegler 1934, 67; Seeligmann 1948, 36).The adjectives πολυτελῆ ἐκλεκτὸν ἔντιμον are all masculine singular, matching λίθον.Isaiah 28:16 is cited by Rom 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet 2:4, 6, and alluded to in Matt 21:42; Luke 20:17; Rom 11:11; Eph 2:20; 2 Tim 2:19. The allusion is not verbal in Matt 21:42 and Luke 20:17, which share only one
word in common with Isa 28:16. Matthew introduces the quotation with Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς; Luke uses Τί οὖν ἐστιν τὸ γεγραμμένον τοῦτο, then followed by Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας. Matthew then adds, παρὰ κυρίου ἐγένετο αὕτη, καὶ ἔστιν θαυμαστὴ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν; Rom 9:33 quotes more directly: καθὼς γέγραπται· Ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼνλίθον προσκόμματος καὶ πέτραν σκανδάλου, καὶὁπιστεύωνἐπʼ αὐτῷοὐκαταισχυνθήσεται. Ephesians 2:20 alludes to the foundation’s cornerstone with ἐποικοδομηθέντες ἐπὶ τῷ θεμελίῳ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν, ὄντος ἀκρογωνιαίου αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. Second Timothy 2:19, mentions the foundation in ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν. First Peter 2:4 alludes to the select honourable stone with the distinctive vocabulary Πρὸς ὃν προσερχόμενοι, λίθον ζῶντα, ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπων μὲν ἀποδεδοκιμασμένον παρὰ δὲ θεῷ ἐκλεκτὸνἔντιμον, then follows up in 1 Pet 2:6 with the quotation: διότι περιέχει ἐν γραφῇ· Ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼνλίθονἀκρογωνιαῖονἐκλεκτὸνἔντιμον, καὶὁπιστεύωνἐπʼ αὐτῷοὐμὴκαταισχυνθῇ.
17 The ὅτι could be causal, and therefore parenthetical, or it could introduce the content of the lie, but this latter option requires that παρέλθῃ be synonymous with ἐπέλθῃ, which, as Ottley noted, carries problems of its own.
18 Although the verb in ἔσεσθεαὐτῇεἰςκαταπάτημα is one of being, not of trampling, because the English “you will become a trampling-ground for it” is rather awkward, the (admitttedly slightly less figurative) meaning is “you will be trampled by it.” The parenthetical note begun byὅτι in verse 17 begins with the storm as its subject. By the time the second-person subject resumes, the main line of discourse has resumed, but it is not clear where it has done so, i.e., whether the clause with hope as its subject is also parenthetical.
19 Although πρωῒ πρωΐ may be a semiticism meaning “every morning” (LEH, s.v.), it likely would not have been recognized as such to a native Greek reader. Eusebius needed to explain that this phrase means it will not delay (τοῦτο δὲ ὑμῖν οὐκ εἰς μακρὸν ἔσται, ἀλλὰ πρωῒ πρωΐ, τοῦτ’ ἔστι διὰ τάχους ἥξειν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς).
21 The analogy Ὥσπερὄροςἀσεβῶνἀναστήσεταιis odd. Ottleyadded“at,” for “As (at) the mount….”Q’s margins allow for the addition of ΚύριοςΠΙΠΙ; S and B have Κύριος, and ΠΙΠΙ is Q’s transliteration of the tetragrammaton.Eusebius said not Lord but the wrath of God would hang over them like a mountain.
22 The verb συντέμνω has to do with cutting something short (such as a speech or a trip), or curtailing something (such as time or expenses). Eusebius interpreted these συντετμημένα deeds as deeds that had been adjudicated, ordained, and settled (κεκριμένα καὶ ὡρισμένα καὶ συντεταγμένα πράγματα, 1.93). Isa 28:22 is alluded to in Rom 9:28, with shared lexical items in modified forms: λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶσυντέμνων ποιήσεικύριος ἐπὶτῆς γῆς.
25 Although the Greek order is μελάνθιονκαὶκύμινον, with black cumin first, and cumin second, to translate that order in English would result in ambiguity. Ottley avoids the problem by translating the former as “fennel,” but neither this or “anise” or “dill” is the correct plant Nigella sativa.
29 The wonders “came forth” (ἐξῆλθεν) from (παράwith the genitive) Lord. Eusebius rephrased this as, ἀπόφασις γὰρ ἀπὸ κυρίου σαβαὼθ ἐξενήνεκται.
Codex Vaticanus (B) seems to differ from Q, S, and A more significantly in the first half of chapter 29 than in previous chapters.
1 Ariel is another name for Jerusalem, as noted also by Eusebius (1.95), who also pointed out that the word refers to the altar (Ezekiel 43:13-16) and means “lion of God.”
2 Although this oracle is against Jerusalem, the name Ariel appears in association with Moab also in 2 Sam 23:20, and Eusebius (1.95) considered it a city of Moab in Isa 15:19 (καὶ ἀρῶ τὸ σπέρμα Μωὰβ καὶ Ἀριήλ).
3 A word cognate to χάρακα is used by Hermas in Similitude 5.2 (χαρακεῖν). Luke 19:43 alludes to Isa 29:3 with ὅτι ἥξουσιν ἡμέραι ἐπὶ σὲ καὶ παρεμβαλοῦσιν οἱ ἐχθροί σου χάρακά σοι καὶ περικυκλώσουσίν σε καὶ συνέξουσίν σε πάντοθεν. Jerome used this paragraph twice, once in Letter 108.8 referring it to David storming Zion. Gregory of Nyssa used it to insult Eunomius.
4 The image is of words falling to the ground unheeded; Jerusalem will have no influence.
5 A series of similes make the point that although the foreign nations who fought against Jerusalem may appear powerful now, this shall pass. The first comparison is to dust.
6 As noted in the comment on 24:22, ἐπισκοπή refers to an examination, often for quality control. In G it is typically the sudden appearance of a superior to ensure standards are being upheld, especially sense this is accompanied with thunder and an earthquake, which are typical accompaniments to God when he appears to humans.
The wealth of the impious is ephemeral(29:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
7 A dream is the next simile indicating the fleeting nature of foreign nations’ wealth. Eusebius interpreted this to refer to Roman luxury (1.95).
8 On the basis of Q and the L family, Ziegler has πεινῶντες for πίνοντες (the reading of S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs). The participle ἐξαναστάντων is a genitive absolute. It is aorist plural, either masculine or neuter in form. The main clauseis verbless, and its subject isτὸἐνύπνιον. Origen (Comm. Matt. 10.24) has “in Jerusalem” where G has ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος Σιών. God’s holy war in 29:6-8 may have influenced Sib. Or. 3.690 and 3 Macc.
9 Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.11) interpreted 29:9-15 as referring to “those who do not believe in Jesus as the Christ,” “the people of the Jews.”
10 This spirit is one of κατανύξεως, which is a state of shock that impairs one’s ability to perceive, think clearly, and express oneself. If οι is an article,the nominate plural οἱὁρῶντεςτὰκρυπτά does not match the singular verb καμμύσει. As a relative pronoun (ὃι), it describes the prophets and rulers. Eusebius opted to interpret the translation of Symmachus instead of G. Isa 29:10 is quoted in Rom 11:8 (using the citation formula καθὼς γέγραπται) as Ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς πνεῦμα κατανύξεως, ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ μὴ βλέπειν. Cyprian (Ep. 54.13; Laps. 33) quoted it against lapsed Christians.
11 Rev 5:1 alludes to the sealed book: Καὶ εἶδον ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν τοῦ καθημένου ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου βιβλίον γεγραμμένον ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν, κατεσφραγισμένον σφραγῖσιν ἑπτά. Hippolytus applied 29:11 to the Pharisees, saying, “The things, therefore, which of old were sealed, are now by the grace of God the Lord all open to the saints” (On Isaiah 2.19). Cyprian (Test. 4) did the same.
12 Gregory Thaumaturgus (Homily 3) said the “learned one” to whom the book was revealed was Joseph, husband of Mary. Origen (Comm. Jo. 5.4) appealed to 29:11-12 to argue for the unity of the sacred book.
13 Matt 15:8-9 and Mark quote 29:13 in reference to the hypocrites. Mark 7:6 reads, ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· Καλῶς ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἠσαΐας περὶ ὑμῶν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, ὡς γέγραπται ὅτι Οὗτοςὁλαὸςτοῖςχείλεσίνμετιμᾷ, ἡδὲκαρδίααὐτῶνπόρρωἀπέχειἀπʼ ἐμοῦ· Matt 15:8 changes the placement of the demonstrative pronoun to closer match Isaiah, quoting ὁλαὸςοὗτοςτοῖςχείλεσίνμετιμᾷ, ἡδὲκαρδίααὐτῶνπόρρωἀπέχειἀπʼ ἐμοῦ·. Colossians 2:22 quotes the part regarding human commandments and teachings using the words ἅ ἐστιν πάντα εἰς φθορὰν τῇ ἀποχρήσει, κατὰ τὰ ἐντάλματακαὶδιδασκαλίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων;
14 Usually the verb μετατίθημι refers to change of mind (3 Kgdms 20:25; Esth C:24; 2 Macc 4:46; 7:24; 3 Macc 1:16; 4 Macc 2:18), but a change of location is also attested (Deut 27:17; Hos 5:10; Ps 45:3), as is a transformation (Gen 5:24; Isa 29:17). Eusebius here read it as a removal from the blessings of association with Lord: καὶ ὁ πᾶς δὲ αὐτῶν λαὸς μετατεθήσεταί φησι τῆς παρ’ ἐμοὶ τιμῆς. Paul quoted 29:14 in 1 Cor 1:19 in reference to the foolishness of the gospel: ἀπολῶ τὴν σοφίαν τῶν σοφῶν, καὶ τὴν σύνεσιν τῶν συνετῶν ἀθετήσω, changing only the last word. Matthew and Luke 10:21 allude to hiding things from the intelligent. Matt 11:25 has Jesus saying, ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἔκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶνκαὶσυνετῶν καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις. Luke 10:21 differs from Matthew only in adding a preposition to the verb: ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἀπέκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶνκαὶσυνετῶν καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις.
15The words ἢ ἃ ἡμεῖς ποιοῦμεν have no equivalent in the Hebrew.
You are the potter’s clay(29:16)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
16 Paul quoted the conversation between the pot and the potter in Rom 9:20: ὦ ἄνθρωπε, μενοῦνγε σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ ἀνταποκρινόμενος τῷ θεῷ; μὴἐρεῖτὸπλάσματῷπλάσαντι· τί μεἐποίησας οὕτως;
Lebanon will be changed(29:17)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
17 According to Eusebius, Lebanon refers to Gentiles, and Carmel refers to the Jewish nation. He considered being changed into a forest a good thing; now the Gentiles too are included in the abundance (good trees and fruits) that a forest provides.
18 The nominative masculine plural article οἱbefore the prepositional phrase ἐντῷσκότειmight be read as referring to people, until the nominative masculine plural noun ὀφθαλμοίis encountered.
The meaning is not that in the darkness and in the fog the eyes of the blind will see, because it is not the verb (seeing) that is modified by prepositional phrases (in the darkness and in the fog), but the noun (the eyes). Jesus alluded to the blind seeing and deaf hearing in reference to his own healing activity, in Matt 11:5 and Luke 7:22. Matthew’s text has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke’s is almost identical, omitting the conjunction a few times: τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Eusebius interpreted the deaf and blind as the Gentiles, and the document as the scriptures.
19 According to Eusebius, the poor and despairing are the idolaters, who (now that the knowledge of God has come to them) now have hope.
The lawless and arrogant are no more(29:20-21)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
20 In the interpretation of Eusebius, the lawless one is the devil, who failed and perished, was arrogant, and enslaved people.
21 The prepositional phrase ἐνἀδίκοις,modifying the active verb ἐπλαγίασαν,could be instrumental (by unjust [means]). Eusebius followed Symmachus (και εκκλινοντες ματαιως το δικαιον) when he interpreted it to mean futility, as shown by his comments in Comm. Isa. 1.96: οἱ δὲ αὐτοὶ ματαίως ἦσαν ἐκκλίνοντες τὸν δίκαιον and ματαίως δὲ καὶ ἀδίκως τοῦτο πράττοντες.
22 According to van der Kooij, the Greek of Isa 29:22 shows more of an interest in the priesthood than the Hebrew (van der Kooij 2012). The evidence for this interest in priesthood is the translation of פדה as ἀφώρισεν, on the premise that being separated from Abraham refers to the selection of Levi’s tribe for the priesthood (77). ἀφώρισεν is an appropriate translation if the translator thought the purpose of the priesthood was to redeem the offspring of Abraham (Num 3:13 and 8:11).
23 The Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9) alludes to the sanctification of the name with Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ἁγιασθήτω τὸὄνομά σου·
They will learn(29:24)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
24 According to Eusebius (1.97), those deceived are the unbeleiving Gentiles, and the prophecy foretells them coming to know the scriptures and God.
1 The plural of the masculine noun ἀποστάτης (rebel) is in apposition to the neuter noun τέκνα (children).
2 Because the infinitiveτοῦβοηθηθῆναιhas the genitive article, it expresses purpose; it is not the complement of ἐπερώτησαν. To convey the same meaning in English a comma was added between “did not ask me”and “to be helped.”
3 According to Keunjoo Kim, G strengthened the warning not to trust in Egypt. Referring to Sollamo’s work on the letter of Aristeas (Sollamo 2001), Kim explained that the translator’s community, who lived in Egypt, felt uncomfortable with the scripture’s warning not to return to Egypt, and so they needed to hear that their protection was not from Egypt but from God (2009, 141).
4 Kim discussed the “nation which will not benefit” in 30:4 (2009, 138), saying “what is at stake is under whose protection they are.”
5 Rahlfs put μάτην κοπιάσουσιν at the end of verse 4, Swete and Ziegler at the beginning of verse 5. Kim translated μάτην as “in vain” (Kim 2009, 139). The Hebrew behind ὄνειδος, חרפה, is not the same as in verse 3, כלמה.
6 The words ἡ ὅρασις τῶν τετραπόδων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ are indented within the column, and the epsilon in the next line’s ἐν is oversized to mark distinction between title and the beginning of the vision. Kim claimed verses 6-7 should be read with 1-5 (Kim 2009, 137); Q’s paragraph spacing suggests a separation between 1-5 and 6-7. The verb ὠφελήσει is impersonal. The Hebrew behind ὄνειδος, חרפה, is the same as in verse 5.
7 The neuter plurals μάταιακαὶκενά must be accusative, since a masculine nominative is already present in the clause. A double accusative is typically used with ὠφελέω to (1) indicate the person benefitted and (2) the way in which that person is benefitted, as in 1 Corinthians 14:6. The meaning is that they are benefitted to no avail and ineffectively. Although spelled the same as the first μάταια, the accent on the final Ματαία is not the same because it is feminine singular, to match παράκλησις. Kim noted that of all the LXX books, Isaiah has the most instances of μάτηνor μάταιος in texts at variance to the MT (Kim 2009, 139).
8 The expression ὅτιἔσταιεἰςἡμέραςκαιρῶνταῦτα is obscure, and Eusebius is no help because he does not comment on this verse. The Hebrew here is ותהיליוםאחרוןלעד. Ottley suggested καιρῶν might be a misunderstanding of לעד. Usually καιρός refers to a fitting period of time, an occasion. The plural form is used eschatologically in Tobit 14:5.The collocation with days may derive from Genesis 1:14. Rev 1:11 shares some phrasing with Isa 30:8, with its ὃ βλέπεις γράψονεἰςβιβλίον καὶ πέμψον ταῖς ἑπτὰ ἐκκλησίαις.
9 Eusebius explained that what the people resisted was the prophet’s advice not to return to Egypt (1.98).
10 Eusebius presumed that Isaiah and his allies were told these exact words rejecting their advice. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. Illum. 14.14) quoted “tell us another deception” in describing the lie the soldiers in Matt 28:13 were advised to tell about how Jesus’ body disappeared.
11 Where Q, S, A, and B have τὸ λόγιον, Rahlfs and Ziegler have τὸν ἅγιον, from a conjecture by Grabe (1730), supported by V and Symmachus. The letters A and Λ are easily confused. The final Ν on the article could be easily missed if written as an overbar over the preceding letter instead of as an independent letter.
The genitive participle phrase πόλεωςὀχυρᾶςἑαλωκυίαςcould be a genitive absolute, in which case it indicates the time when the wall falls (“when a secure city has been captured”). But more likely the genitive is the qualifier ofthe wall (“a falling wall of a secure city that has been captured”). The adverb παραχρῆμα indicates something closely following another in time.
14 Swete spelled ἀγγείου as ἀγγίου. Not only is the fall immediate, it is irreparable.
15 Where Q, S, A (Ziegler) have ἐβούλεσθε, S and the first-hand of B (Rahlfs) have ἠβούλεσθε. An aorist participle such as ἀποστραφείς would typically indicate an action that took place prior to the finite verb (στενάξῃς): turning back, then groaning, then being saved. But that is not a strict rule, as the well-known expression ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν demonstrates. In English we can convey a similar meaning equally idiomatically by joining two finite verbs with “and” (“turn and groan”).
16 Isaiah ironically turns the confident boast that horses would enable them to flee (safely) into a curse that yes, indeed, they will have to flee. Eusebius added that although they flee, they would not be able to escape Babylon and Egypt.
17 The addressees will be so frightened that even though they outnumber their attackers, they will flee. Eusebius (1.98) noted that a pole was raised by sinking ships, presumably as an SOS call much as a flare might be used today.
God will have pity on you(30:18)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
18 Not all will be destroyed; a remnant of the faithful will survive because of God’s mercy.
19 Διότι (a contraction of διὰ τοῦτο ὅτι) indicates the cause for something, not its effect.
Lord will give you scarcity(30:20-21)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
20 Ottley rejected the suggestion that πλανῶντες (“deceivers”) indicates that G read מנדי (from נדד “wander”) for מורי “teachers”; preferring the explanation
that πλανῶντες simply translates מורי and adds the clarification that the teaching is false.
21 Eusebius explained that the returnees from Babylon in the time of Ezra experienced hardship, but because their eyes could now recognize their deceivers, their ears did not receive the deceptive words (1.99).
22 The expression λεπτὰ ποιήσεις is similar to that in Exod 32:20 (κατήλεσεν λεπτόν), where the golden calf was pulverized, and to 4 Kingdoms 23:6 (ἐλέπτυνεν εἰς χοῖν), where Josiah pulverized the Asherah.
24 The accusative participles ἀναπεποιημένα and λελικμημένα modify ἄχυρα, not κριθῇ.
Running water on mountains and hills(30:25)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
25 The restoration of fertility is symbolized by an abundance of running water. Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.2) interpreted “every” mountain and hill to mean that the abundance would be universal. Eusebius explained that this happened after Jerusalem was restored, and connected the abundance of water with the desire for proper behaviour: βιάζεται καὶ τὸν μὴ θέλοντα ἐπὶ τροπολογίαν σπεύδειν (1.99).
26 According to Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.2), the injury that is to be healed is the result of Adam’s sin: death. This is to be healed at the final resurrection.
28 Because it follows a preposition, πλανήσειmust be the noun πλάνησιςrather than the verb from which it derives, πλανάω. This root carries the sense of misleading, commonly with regard to one’s thinking being led astray. In Isaiahthis meaning is more idiomatically rendered as deception.
29 The first-hand of Marchalianus wrote τοῦ θεοῦ; Q’s marginal note reads τοῦ Κυρίου ΠΙΠΙ, transliterating the tetragrammaton; Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus (Rahlfs) have τοῦ Κυρίου, but Vaticanus (Ziegler) omits τοῦ.
The wrath of God’s arm(30:30)[[@Bible:Isa 30:29-30]]
30 Although δεῖξαι is the reading in Q and all three oldest uncials, Rahlfs and Ziegler have δεῖξει, on the basis of V. Swete spelled συγκαταφερομένη as συνκαταφερομένη.
31 The voice of the Lord will defeat the Assyrians. The particle ἄν typically denotes contingency, often (as here) corresponding to the English “ever.”According to BDAG, when with a future apodosis (such as πατάξῃ here), the action could be repeated or singular. The contingency is difficult to express in English without diluting the certainty of the action itself. It is the timing of the blow that is indefinite. Eusebius explained that the Assyrians stand for any arrogant tyrants (1.100).
32 The referent of the third person singular pronoun “him” is not provided in the context; it would not be Lord because he has no need of aid. The plural “they” who will make war are identified by Eusebius as demons (1.100).
33 For reading ἀπαιτηθήσῃ (the reading of Q, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), S corrector cb3 has ἀπαιτηθήσει (the original hand of Sinaiticus wrote ἀπετηθήσει); Ziegler has ἀπατηθήσῃ, which is attested in Greek manuscripts from the 9th century on, but also in Theodoret and Jerome. The passive of ἀπαιτέω is rare; ἀπαιτέω in the active voice means demand repayment. Instead of the more grammatical σοί (the reading also of Swete, Rahlfs, and Ziegler), S, A, and B* have σύ. Revelation 19:20 alludes to the fire and brimstone: καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας
τῇ εἰκόνι αὐτοῦ· ζῶντες ἐβλήθησαν οἱ δύο εἰς τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρὸς τῆς καιομένης ἐν θείῳ. The lake of Revelation is inspired by the deep valley of Isaiah.
1 Kim noted that G makes more clear than MT the contrast between what Israel did and did not trust (Kim 2009, 147).
2 In the absence of punctuation between καὶ αὐτὸς σοφός and ἦγεν ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς κακά, the nominative singulars αὐτὸς σοφός should be taken as the subject of ἦγεν and not as a separate nominal clause such as “And he is wise; he kept bringing evils on them.” The σοφός is a substantival use of the adjective, and αὐτός is emphatic. Kim noted two differences from MT: the emphasis on the word of God, and the paraphrase of “against their vain hope” (Kim 2009, 148).
3 Κύριος here has the article. The verb ἐπάγω denotes causing motion over or on something. Typically this involves hostile intent (Isa 1:25; 42:25; 26:14; GELS) or is otherwise something bad (BDAG). Punishment is specifically involved in Exodus 32:24; 34:7. So this should not be interpreted as God’s protective hand. Kim’s interpretation is “that Egypt is, actually, horseflesh, not to be trusted and not to be hoped in” (Kim 2009, 148).
4 Two near synonyms βοήσῃand κεκράξῃ are used; Louw-Nida associates unusually loud volume with βοάω and an unpleasant sound with κράζω.
5 The near-synonyms σῴζω andἐξαιρέομαι both denote rescue from danger; σῴζω also implies restoration to well-being (Louw-Nida). Strikingly, verses 4 and 5 contrast in Lord’s treatment of Jerusalem: in verse 4 he attacks Mount Zion but in verse 5 he rescues and shields Jerusalem. Eusebius indicated the
verse 4 attack is against the enemies of Jerusalem (who were occupying the city when the exiles returned), thereby protecting his people who are about to inhabit the city (2.1). Luke 13:34 echoes the image of the bird protecting her young under her wings, with the words Ἰερουσαλὴμ Ἰερουσαλήμ, ἡ ἀποκτείνουσα τοὺς προφήτας καὶ λιθοβολοῦσα τοὺς ἀπεσταλμένους πρὸς αὐτήν, ποσάκις ἠθέλησα ἐπισυνάξαι τὰ τέκνα σου ὃν τρόπονὄρνις τὴν ἑαυτῆς νοσσιὰν ὑπὸ τὰς πτέρυγας, καὶ οὐκ ἠθελήσατε.
6 Theophilus of Antioch (Autol. 3.9) used 31:6 to show that God has always desired repentance. The Exhortation to Repentance attributed to Cyprian uses 31:6 to show that all sins may be forgiven.
7 Joseph and Aseneth 10.12 alludes to 31:7, with its gold and silver idols: Καὶ ἔλαβε πάντας τοὺς θεοὺς αὐτῆς τοὺς χρυσοῦς καὶ ἀργυροῦς, ὧν οὐκ ἦν ἀριθμός.
8 The combination of εἰμί with εἰς indicates becoming.
9 The section break was disputed already in the time of Eusebius, who noted that the Septuagint has the section begin with τάδε λέγει Κύριος (as in Marchalianus and Sinaiticus), but other translations begin a section after this clause: κατὰ δὲ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἑρμηνευτὰς ἐπειδὴ τὸ φησὶ κύριος τῇ ἀνωτέρῳ διανοίᾳ συνῆψαν τὰ προκείμενα ἐξ ἑτέρας ἀρχῆς ἰδιαζούσης προσηνέγκαντο (2.2). Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.3) took 31:9-32:1 as a prediction of the earthly kingdom of Christians after their resurrection.
1 Since the ruler will be δίκαιος, and the rule will be with κρίσεως, justice will be the defining characteristic of this kingdom.
2 The presence of the article on ὁἄνθρωπος means the clause cannot be rendered as “And there is a man who is hiding his words.” That would be the meaning if ἄνθρωποςὁ were written instead. Σιών translates the consonants but not the vowel pointing of the MT’s צָיוֹן. The feminine dative singular present participle διψώσῃ modifies γῇ. The contract vowel (lexical form διψάω) contracts with the ουto form ω.
3 Presumably if the people’s trust is no longer in humans, it will be in God.
4 The verb προσέχω denotes paying close attention with effort. This is conveyed better in English by “endeavor” than “try,” which can imply failure.
5 In this new kingdom, fools will no longer be the rulers. According to Eusebius, the righteous king gave the apostles the rule of his church, and no longer will polytheistic and godless teachers rule (2.2).
6 The phrase τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας κενὰς ποιῆσαι has a verb that can take a double accusative, one of which is a noun (in this case a noun phrase, τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας), and the other an adjective (κενάς). The resulting meaning is to make these souls empty, i.e., to empty them.
7 The noun βουλή can refer to the capacity to make wise decisions, the activity of deciding, the information used in making a decision, the resulting decision, or an official decision-making group. In the prophets, most often βουλή signifies the result of deliberation, the object of one’s will, or what one tries to cause. But here βουλή is the subject of the verb βουλεύσεται, so the decision-making group is meant.
The council of the pious(32:8)[[@Bible:Isa 30:29-30]]
8 Retaining the meaning of βουλή from the preceding verse, here again it should be taken to refer to the body of deliberators. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 2.15) used 32:8 to show human moral choices are within our power.
9 Tertullian (Marc. 4.19) said the rich women following Christ were the wealthy ladies prophesied by Isaiah in 32:9-10.
10 The form of the noun ἡμέρας is ambiguous; it could be accusative plural (days of a year) or genitive singular (a year’s day). Eusebius took it as a plural (μνείαν
ποιήσασθαι ἐνιαυτοῦ τινος ἡμερῶν), yielding a sentence with a double accusative. In his interpretation, the year referred to is the year of the Lord’s favour quoted by Jesus in Luke 4:18, i.e., the time of Jesus’ ministry on earth.
Confident women, grieve the coming loss(32:10-14)[[@Bible:Isa 32:9-13]]
10
11 Because all the women’s resources have been used up, the time of want is coming. According to Eusebius, the wealth symbolizes luxury and former disbelief. Girding one’s loins is a masculine act (2.3).
12 The noun ἐπιθύμημα normally refers to an object of desire rather than the emotion of desire (but note Isa 27:2). Ottley has “a field of desire;” Brenton has “pleasant field,” which is the gloss provided in LEH. Eusebius, too, interpreted it as an attributive genitive, calling this the ἐπιθυμητὸν ἀμπελῶνα from Isa 27:2 (2.3). The genitives ἀμπέλου γενήματος are ambiguous regarding which is the head noun: “a vine’s produce” or “a produce’s vine,” but only one of these makes sense.
13 The nouns ἄκανθακαὶχόρτοςare nominative, but so is ἡγῆ. The subject of the singular ἀναβήσεται is more likelyἡγῆ, with the thorns and grass indicating what the land will become.Alternatively, ἡγῆ could be casus pendens, in which case a translation as “As for the land, thorns and grass will come up” would be appropriate; although this requires that a singular verb have a plural subject, it is not an impossible interpretation.
15 Acts 1:8 alludes to the spirit coming upon people in Isa 32:15 with the words ἀλλὰ λήμψεσθε δύναμιν ἐπελθόντος τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς.
16 Eusebius connected the mention of Carmel and the forest to a similar prophecy in Isaiah 29:17. There, the forest was a symbol of abundance, but here he points out that forests consist of trees that do not produce fruit (2.3).
17 The phrase πεποιθότες ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος cannot be a clause on its own because it has no verb; it must be in apposition to the nominative from the preceding clause. The manuscript Eusebius used likely had ἔσονται (as A and
Scb2), since he paraphrased, ἔσεσθαι ἐν αὐτῇ ἔργαδικαιοσύνης, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔσονταί φησιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ταύτῃ πεποιθότεςἕωςτοῦαἰῶνος. Paul alluded to the connection between righteousness, trust, and peace, in Romans 5:1, Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεόν. The wording of James 3:18 is even closer: καρπὸς δὲ δικαιοσύνης ἐν εἰρήνῃ σπείρεται τοῖς ποιοῦσιν εἰρήνην.
18 The participle πεποιθώς is nominative masculine singular, modifying λαός.
19 Those who are protected are now addressed in the second person, “you” (ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς), whom the hail will not touch. The words οὐκ ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς ἥξει καὶ ἔσονται οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες … πεποιθότες have no correspondence in the Hebrew, which says only “And it hails at the coming down of the forest, and the city will become low in humiliation.” Van der Vorm-Croughs suggested, “The final words of 32:19 in the Hebrew—ריעהלפשתהלפשבורעיה—have been entirely rearranged in the Greek. While רעיה and הלפשבו are used with a different function, לפשתריעה has been omitted. The new sentence in the LXX has been complemented with the words καὶ ἔσονται οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες and πεποιθότες ὡς, which may additionally serve to tie v.19 to vv.17–18 more closely” (2014, 325).
20 Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 6.1) quoted Isa 32:20 to show that the labour is justified. According to Eusebius, the water symbolizes the scriptures, the ox is the Jews, and the donkey is the Gentiles.
Woe to those who distress you(33:1)[[@Bible:Isa 32:20-33:1]]
1 The accusative pronoun ὑμᾶς could be the object of either ἀθετῶν or ἀθετεῖ, leaving the other without an object. Because this participle is so commonly used in Isaiah (21:2; 24:16; 31:1; 48:8), “rebel” is a more suitable translation than “reject.” Only in Isa 1:2; 63:8 is the participle form absent. Luke 10:16 echoes Isa 33:1, with its ὁ ἀθετῶν ὑμᾶς ἐμὲ ἀθετεῖ. The prevalence of ἡττάομαι in Isa 30-33 is because these chapters describe the result of placing one’s trust in human rather than divine power. It appears in 30:31; 31:4; 31:9; and now in 33:1; the noun ἥττημα appears also in 31:8.
2 As Ottley noted, the transition here is abrupt, but Eusebius connected these blessed people with those who sowed the seed, namely the apostles. According to him, the resistance is to the evangelical preaching, and Lord is the salvation of the apostles (2.4). G read זרע “seed” instead of זרוע “arm,” and בגדים “resistant” instead of לבקרים “in the morning.”
3 According to Eusebius, it was the Jewish nation who was scattered to the nations (2.4).
4 Although the addressee “you” is still Lord, Eusebius instead said it was the Jewish nation who was mocked (2.4). G sometimes adds μικροῦ καὶ μεγάλου with no Hebrew basis (9:14; 22:5, 24; 33:19).
5 According to Eusebius (2.4), the “desert” (32:16) is now named Zion, which symbolizes the church of Christ.
6 Ottley wrote that ἐν νόμῳ “may be an attempt to render אמונת, ‘faithfulness,’ a plural form: or can LXX. have read אמרה, in the sense of ‘command,’ ‘appointment’? In Nehem. 11:23, אמונה is ‘a settled provision,’ R.V.; LXX. omit the clause. The sentence runs somewhat like the opening of 34:16, and παραδοθήσονται almost warns us that LXX. are in difficulties. עתיך, ‘thy times,’ has evidently been misread: the obscure word עתיק suggests itself (23:18 fin.) but does not give any help” (2:270).
7 The prophecy reassures the audience that the tables will be turned so that the fearsome will be fearful. The papyri in the national library at Vienna numbered G 17417 and G 23164, include text from Isaiah 33:7-8, 17-19; 40:13-14, 24-26 (Bastianini 1982; Wessely 1909). This manuscript dates from the third century CE, and Rahlfs gave them the sigla 881 and 0948 (Rahlfs and Fraenkel 2004, 393–94). Likely it is from the same manscript as papyrus G 2320. Where Q and B have οὗτοι, S and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have αὐτοὶ. Weis noted that the reading ἐν τῷ φόβῳ ὑμῶν αὐτοὶ φοβηθήσονται implies not a single word אֶרְאֶלָּם but two words ארא לם, as in 1QIsaa (Weis 1991).
8 Eusebius noted that the phrase “the fear of the nations has ceased” is missing in the Hebrew and other translations. Ottley attempted an explanation: “The easiest supposition seems to be, that, confusing the two expressions, עבר ארח ‘wayfaring man’ and מאס ערים ‘he despiseth the cities,’ they omitted the first, and put the second in its place, reading עמים ‘peoples’ for ערים, and perhaps taking מאס, in the sense of מסס, of fainting for fear. Whether עבר was conversely read after ‘covenant,’ and הפר, ‘he hath broken,’ omitted, or the latter paraphrased as αἴρεται, it is hardly possible to say” (Ottley 1904). Note the Dead Sea Scroll (1QIsaa) has עדים in place of ערים.
9 Ottley suggested G read גמא instead of קמל “withers,” and ערבים, “willows” instead of כערבה “like a desert.” According to Eusebius, “Lebanon” refers to Jerusalem, as in Zechariah 11:1 and Ezekiel 17:3-4, and being put to shame refers to the cessation of sacrifice (2.4).
10 The reversal indicated in the preceding paragraph now has a cause: Lord will arise. Despite the combination of resurrection (ἀναστήσομαι), glorification (δοξασθήσομαι), and exaltation (ὑψωθήσομαι). Eusebius did not understand Isaiah 33:10 as a prophecy of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. In his Commentary on Isaiah 2.4, all he had to say is, Ὁ μὲν οὖν φιλάνθρωπος θεὸς “ἀγγέλους ἀπέστειλεν εἰρήνης” πρὸς τὸν Ἰουδαίων λαὸν “πικρῶς κλαίοντας καὶ παρακαλοῦντας” ἀποδέξασθαι τὴν εὐαγγελιζομένην αὐτοῖς “εἰρήνην.” ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐκ ἐδέξαντο αὐτούς, ἐπιφέρει φάσκων· νῦν ἀναστήσομαι, λέγει κύριος, νῦν δοξασθήσομαι, νῦν ὑψωθήσομαι· νῦν ὄψεσθε, νῦν αἰσθηθήσεσθε, τὴν δευτέραν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔνδοξον παρουσίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενος, καθʼ ἣν ὄψονται καὶ αἴσθησιν αὐτοῦ τῆς θεότητος λήψονται. τότε δὲ δοξασθήσεται αὐτὸς καὶ ὑψωθήσεται. καὶ τότε γνώσονται, ὅτι ματαία ἦν ἄρα ἡ ἰσχὺς τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτῶν· πῦρ γὰρ κατέδεται αὐτούς, διὸ εἰς αὐτῶν πρόσωπον εἴρηται· ματαία ἡ ἰσχὺς τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν, πῦρ κατέδεται ὑμᾶς. In short, he blamed Jews for rejecting the prophets, and said this prophecy refers to the second coming (τὴν δευτέραν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔνδοξον παρουσίαν) because of the following verse, with no mention of resurrection. The only other early commentator (before the middle of the 4th century) who had anything to say about Isaiah 33:10 was Cyprian. In Test. 2.26 he linked Daniel 7:13-14, Isaiah 33:10-11, Psalm 110:1-2, Revelation 1:12-18, and Matt 28:18-20 to show that after his resurrection, Christ would receive all power from the Father.
11 When Lord arises and is exalted, the addressees both benefit (in seeing and perceiving) and suffer (in being devoured by fire). Ottley suggested G read תראו or תחזו instead of תהרו “you will conceive” and תבושו “be ashamed” instead of חשׁשׁ “dry grass.” Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 10) quoted 33:11 to warn his readers of the penalty of disobedience.
12 Scholz suggested G read שׂדה “field” instead of שׂיד “lime.” According to Eusebius, the addressees are the nations since they will be burned (2.4).
13 Barnabas 9.1 quotes 33:13 as a prophecy of the circumcision of Christian ears: Ἀκοῇ ἀκούσονται οἱ πόρρωθεν, ἅ ἐποίησα γνώσονται. Justin (Dial. 70) quoted 33:13-19 as a prophecy of the bread and cup Christ gave “us,” and of the appearance of glorified Christ to Christians: Ἀκούσατε, οἱ πόῤῥωθεν, ἃ ἐποίησα· γνώσονται οἱ ἐγγίζοντες τὴς ἰσχύν μου. Ἀπέστησαν οἱ ἐν Σιὼν ἄνομοι· λήψεται τρόμος τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς. Τίς ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν τὸν τόπον τὸν αἰώνιον; Πορευόμενος ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, λαλῶν εὐθεῖαν ὁδὸν, μισῶν ἀνομίαν καὶ ἀδικίαν, καὶ τὰς χεῖρας ἀφωσιωμένος ἀπὸ δώρων, βαρύνων ὦτα ἵνα μὴ ἀκούσῃ κρίσιν ἄδικον αἵματος, καμμύων τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἵνα μὴ ἴδῃ ἀδικίαν· οὗτος οἰκήσει ἐν ὑψηλῷ σπηλαίῳ πέτρας ἰσχυρᾶς. Ἄρτος δοθήσεται αὐτῷ, καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ πιστόν. Βασιλέα μετὰ δόξης ὄψεσθε, καὶ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὑμῶν ὄψονται πόῤῥωθεν. Ἡ ψυχὴὑμῶν μελετήσει φόβον κυρίου. Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ γραμματικός; Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱβουλεύοντες; Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ ἀριθμῶν τοὺςτρεφομένους, μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν λαόν; Ὧι οὐ συνεβουλεύσαντο, οὐδὲ ᾔδεισαν βάθη φωνῶν, ὥστε μὴ ἀκοῦσαι· λαὸς πεφαυλισμένος, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιτῷ ἀκούοντι σύνεσις.
14 The rhetorical questions ask who will warn about a fire and an eternal place. Although Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13) quoted 33:14-16 as a prophecy of the “eternal place,” that is heaven, Eusebius considered the eternal place and the fire one and the same, and therefore is the place prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt 25:41). Although G usually translated חנפים as ἄνομοι (9:17; 10:6; 24:5; 32:6), here we have ἀσεβεῖς. Ottley suggested G read יגיד “make known” instead of יגור “soujourn.” Scholz suggested G read מקום instead of מוקדי “burnings.”
15 As Scholz suggested, G chose μισῶν because of its phonological similarity to מאס. According to Eusebius, these witnesses are the prophets, every god-loving person, and especially the apostles (2.5).
16 Barnabas 11.4-5 quotes 33:16 as prophecy of Jesus’ baptism (water) and crucifixion (rock): κατοικήσεις ἐνὑψηλῷσπηλαίῳπέτραςἰσχυρᾶςκαί· τὸὕδωραὐτοῦπιστόν· βασιλέαμετὰδόξηςὄψεσθε, καὶἡψυχὴὑμῶνμελετή̀σειφόβον κυρίου. This passage interprets the “king in his glory” as the Son (at baptism).
17 Cyprian (Test. 2.29) quoted 33:17 as a prophecy of the eternal reign of Christ. Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13) quoted it as prophecy of Christ’s miracles in the presence of the Jews (“you will see the king with his glory”), and of the prohibition against Jews living in their land (“you shall see the land from afar”). Hippolytus (Antichr. 44) quoted it as a prophecy of Jesus’ second advent.
18 Note the difference between Rahlfs (τρεφομένους, B) and Ziegler (συστρεφομένους, Q, S, and A). The use of φόβος in a positive context calls for closer inspection. Muraoka presents three clusters of meaning for this noun (dread, reverence, and an object of fear). The one that most suits being the object of a verb (as of μελετάω here) is an object of fear, i.e., that which/whom is feared, which is also appropriate in Isa 8:12-13; 24:17-18; Gen 31:42; Dan 11:31. Nevertheless, Eusebius interpreted the fear here in light of what precedes, explaining that those cast out far from this land “will fall into fear of their condemnation” (2.5).On the meaning of μελετάω see the discussion on 38:14.
18 Eusebius identified the addressees here as the scribes and Pharisees condemned by Jesus in Matt23:13. He repeatedly qualified the gathering with κολακείαις “with flattery”:ὁ ἀριθμῶν τοὺς τρεφομένους, μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν λαόν, ᾧ οὐ συνεβουλεύσαντο, κολακείαις δὲ αὐτοὺς τρέφοντες διέστρεφον. Ottley suggested that τρεφομένους, the reading of B (Rahlfs and Eusebius), is the only one that corresponds to the Hebrew, and that συσ– may have been prefixed to the verb in almost all other manuscripts under the influence of the preceding τους. Paul alluded to 33:18 in 1 Cor 1:20 as follows: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦγραμματεύς; ποῦσυζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
19 The translation συνεβουλεύσαντο indicates that G read נועץ “was counselled” where MT has נועז “be insolent.” The masculine singular relative pronoun most simply refers back to the people. The dative with συμβουλεύω indicates who was consulted, as in Herodotus, Histories 2.107.2 συμβουλεύεσθαι τῇ γυναικί, so in this case an unspecified plural “they” did not consult the people. The syntax of this verse is difficult in Greek. Ottley has “with whom they took not counsel, nor knew he them: deep of speech, so that he heard them not: (it is) a despised people, and there is no understanding to him that heareth.” Silva has “They took no counsel with him, nor did he know deep speech, so that a despised people could not hear, and there is no understanding to the one who hears.” Eusebius evidently had some difficulty too; he brought in Symmachus as a clearer translation. Eusebius continued to apply this prophecy to Jesus’ opponents, saying they are the despised people who cannot understand the people of deep speech (2.5).
20 The phrase ἸδοὺΣιὼνἡπόλιςτὸσωτήριονἡμῶν has no verb, so it could be interpreted as an equative verbless clause “Look, the city of Sion is our salvation!” (Silva) or as an exclamation “Look, the city of Sion, our salvation!” (Brenton and Ottley). Eusebius is not much help; in his interpretation of the LXX he said we are invited to look at the city that is is called our salvation (τὴν πόλιν τὴν καλουμένην τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν). The phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον appears in Isaiah also in 9:6; 13:20 (which translates the same Hebrew as 33:20); 14:20; 18:7; 34:10, 17. Outside of Isaiah, it appears in the translated LXX only in Exodus 14:13, as well as in Judith 15:10; Pss. Sol. 15:13; Baruch 3:32. Because αἰῶνα is not an adjective but rather a noun like χρόνον, the relationship between the two nouns deserves some explanation.Eusebius saw no need to explain the grammar here; to him it means the stakes of this new city will be immovable, in contrast to the shakings it had experienced in the past.Irenaeus (Haer. 3.20.4) quoted 33:20 as a prophecy that Christ the savior would be visible, since it says, “your eyes shall see our salvation.”
21 There is no difference in meaning between διώρυγες (the reading also of S, A, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) and διώρυχες (the reading of B); both mean canals. The active participle ἐλαῦνον “driving” modifies πλοῖον “ship,” not the verb “go” adverbially.
22 Τhe Acts of Pilate 16 (first Greek form) has the Jewish people quoting 33:22 in reference to the one Lord of Israel. In Sinaiticus, corrector ca corrected the mistaken reading originally penned by scribe B “my God is Megar” to “my God is great,” which is what all other witnesses have.
23 Ottley pointed out that it is unclear whether the metaphor with its cords, pole, and tarp envisages a ship or a tent, but Eusebius clearly understood it as a ship (ἐρράγη τὰ σχοινία καὶ ὁ ἱστὸς δὲ αὐτῆς ὡσπερεί τινος νηὸς ἐν χειμῶσι καὶ κλύδωσι, 2.6).
24 Acts 10:43 may be alluding to this forgiveness of sins as what is mentioned by prophets, in its statement, τούτῳ πάντες οἱ προφῆται μαρτυροῦσιν ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν λαβεῖν διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ πάντα τὸν πιστεύοντα εἰς αὐτόν.
1 Nations, rulers, the land, and its inhabitants are all summoned. The translation of לאמים “peoples” as ἄρχοντες has precedent in Gen 27:29 and occurs again in Isa 41:1; 43:4, 9. Eusebius interpreted γῆ (land) to mean the οἰκουμένη (world).
2 The nations are summoned to learn of their destruction because of Lord’s wrath.
3 The extent of the destruction is presented in physiological and sensual images of rising odor and blood-drenched mountains.
5 Jerome used this verse to show that even heaven is imperfect; how much more so the earth.
7 The preposition ἀπό is not the typical way to express what is causing drunkenness in Greek; here in both instances the translator used it because it is a formal equivalent of the Hebrew מ. In verse 6, the same idea is expressed without ἀπό, in ἡ μάχαιρα Κυρίου ἐνεπλήσθη αἵματος, because there the Hebrew has no מ. Revelation 17:6 alludes to the image of being drunk from blood, in the words καὶ εἶδον τὴν γυναῖκα μεθύουσαν ἐκ τοῦαἵματοςτῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος τῶν μαρτύρων Ἰησοῦ.
8 Matthew 11:22 echoes the day of judgement, with the words Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως ἢ ὑμῖν.
9 Because it is in parallel with pitch, θεῖον here is not the accusative of the adjective θεῖος “divine” but the neuter noun θεῖον, sulfur, i.e. brimstone.
10 The genitives of time νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας indicate when the burning takes place. See the note at 33:20 regarding the phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον. Revelation 14:11 alludes to the smoke going up forever, night and day: καὶ ὁ καπνὸς τοῦ βασανισμοῦ αὐτῶν εἰς αἰῶνας αἰώνων ἀναβαίνει, καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἀνάπαυσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς οἱ προσκυνοῦντες τὸ θηρίον καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα αὐτοῦ. Revelation 18:18 mentions the smoke: καὶ ἔκραζον βλέποντες τὸν καπνὸν τῆς πυρώσεως αὐτῆς. Revelation 19:3 again alludes to the eternally rising smoke: καὶ ὁ καπνὸς αὐτῆς ἀναβαίνει εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.
11 Swete spelled ἴβεις the way it is spelled in Q, εἴβεις. A σπαρτίονis a diminuitive σπάρτον, “cord;” commonly it is used for measuring (Jer 52:21; Ezek 40:3; Job 38:5), which is how it is used here, namely for measuring land (“geo-metry”). Brenton, Ottley, and Silva all call this the measuring line of desolation,
but I see no precedent for rendering this substantive adjective as an abstract noun. When used substantivally, it refers to a desolate place.Rev 18:2 alludes to the habitation of mythical beings, birds, and mixed creatures, with the words: καὶ ἐγένετο κατοικητήριον δαιμονίων καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς πνεύματος ἀκαθάρτου καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς ὀρνέου ἀκαθάρτου [καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς θηρίου ἀκαθάρτου] καὶ μεμισημένου. Emerton argued (against Ziegler 1934, 70, 142) that G should not be used to posit an original Hebrew text longer than the MT, which included the statement that satyrs would dwell there. Emerton’s suggestion is that σπαρτίον γεωμετρίας ἐρήμου corresponds to קו תהו, that G read בהו as בה “in her,” and ואיי instead of ואבני. It is therefore unnecessary to posit a Hebrew text containing the words ושעירים ישבו בה, which were translated by G yet the words ואבני בהו were not (Emerton 1982a).
12 The desolation of the land leads to anarchy. The Hebrew corresponding to οἱ ἄρχοντες αὐτῆς is חריה. G read איןwithout the conjunction instead of ואין, he read מלכיה instead of מלוכה, and וקראיה instead of יקראו. Eusebius saw the fulfilment of this prophecy in the expulsion of Jews from Jerusalem.
13 Ziegler pointed to 35:7 to support the reading ἔπαυλις (in Q, S*, Rahlfs, and Ziegler); it was changed by corrector cb3 to the plural ἐπαύλεις, which matches the reading of A and B.
14 Note the difference between Rahlfs (βοήσουσιν, the reading of S*) and Ziegler (βοήσονται, the reading of Q, Scb2, A, and B). The rough breathing mark on αὑτοῖς is to indicate this is a reflexive pronoun. As in 34:11, allusions to this verse imply that mythical creatures were considered unclean spirits. Matthew 12:43 might allude to the belief that such mythical beings lived in the desert seeking rest, in the words Ὅταν δὲ τὸ ἀκάθαρτον πνεῦμα ἐξέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, διέρχεται διʼ ἀνύδρων τόπων ζητοῦν ἀνάπαυσιν καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκει. Once again, the language of Revelation 18:2 echoes some of the ideas of this verse, strengthening its association with 34:11. Q contains a marginal note with the readings of Aquila and Symmachus, which use Λιλιθ and Λάμιᾰ respectively in place of ὀνοκένταυροι.
15 Ottley suggested G read קפד instead of קפוז.
16 According to Eusebius, the deer (a clean animal) who were commanded are the apostles, commanded to make disciples of all nations.
17 The phrase διεμέρισεν βόσκεσθαι implies an object that must be made explicit in English, and his hand distributed food for them to be fed. The feminine gender of αὐτῆς refers to an implied γῆ, land that is inherited (κληρονομήσατε), or it could simply be feminine because the Hebrew pronoun is feminine here (בה).
1 The adjective ἔρημος is feminine (as is usual for the substantive use), agreeing with the feminine nominative participle of διψάω. My translation retains the adjective form and supplies “land,” representing the implied noun γῆ. Arie van der Kooij argued on the basis of 32:2 and 25:5, where Zion is associated with a “thirsty land,” that G “reflects the idea that the transformation of the desert as an image alludes to the restoration of Zion from being a desert to a place of life” (2010, 11). Van der Kooij pointed out that according the Eusebius, the desert in 35:1-2 is not the same “desert” as in chapter 34, where it was Jewish Jerusalem; but contra van der Kooij’s (unreferenced) assertion that here the desert alludes to Zion, Eusebius did not call the desert Zion or Jerusalem in 2.9, but rather it is the church of God (καὶ ἡ πάλαι δὲ ἔρημος καὶ ἄνυδρος καὶ ἄκαρπος, λέγω δὲ ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ). To arrive at τὰ ἔρημα τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, rather than claiming “this expression has no basis in the Hebrew text” (van der Kooij 2010, 13), it seems to me preferable to suppose (as Ottley did) that G derived גילת from גלה “lay bare” rather than גיל “exult” and read ירדן “Jordan” rather than ירק “and singing,” an explanation van der Kooij accepted as incomplete (2010, 19). I remain unconvinced that G considered the “desert” here to refer to Zion. Justin (Dial. 69) quoted 35:1-7 (with minor changes) as a prophecy that Gentiles would renounce idols and hope in Christ, as follows: Εὐφράνθητι ἔρημος ἡ διψῶσα, ἀγαλλιάσθω ἔρημος, καὶ ἐξανθείτω ὡς κρίνον. Καὶ ἐξανθήσει καὶ ἀγαλλιάσεται τὰ ἔρημα τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, καὶ ἡ δόξα τοῦ Λιβάνου ἐδόθη αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ Καρμήλου. Καὶ ὁ λαός μου ὄψεται τὸ ὕψος κυρίου, καὶ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἰσχύσατε χεῖρες ἀνειμέναι, καὶ γόνατα παραλελυμένα. Παρακαλεῖσθε οἱ ὀλιγόψυχοι τῇ καρδίᾳ, ἰσχύσατε, μὴ φοβεῖσθε. Ἰδοὺ ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν κρίσιν ἀνταποδίδωσικαὶ ἀνταποδώσει· αὐτὸς ἥξει καὶ σώσει ἡμᾶς. Τότε ἀνοιχθήσονται ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν, καὶ ὦτα κωφῶν ἀκούσονται· τότε ἁλεῖται ὡς ἔλαφος ὁ χωλὸς, καὶ τρανὴ ἔσται γλῶσσα μογιλάλων· ὅτι ἐῤῥάγη ἐνἐρήμῳ ὕδωρ καὶ φάραγξ ἐν τῇ διψώσῃ, καὶ ἡ ἄνυδρος ἔσται εἰς ἕλη, καὶ εἰςδιψῶσαν γῆν πηγὴ ὕδατος ἔσται. Tertullian (Marc. 4.8) saw in 35:1 a prophecy that Jesus’ temptation would be in the desert.
3 When the object of ἀνίημι is hands (as in Sirach 30:34; Isa 37:27; 2 Kings 24:16 || 1 Chron 21:15), typically the meaning is to relent; but Isa 25:11 and Jer 15:6 have the sense of spreading out one’s hand for destruction. Eusebius here based his interpretation on the parallel with feeble knees, and certainly the command Ἰσχύσατε fits this meaning. The sense is the opposite of clenched and ready for action. These hands are relaxed, at ease, forceless; hence “impotent.” Hebrews 12:12 clearly alludes to exhortation to strenghten slack hands and knees in the words τὰς παρειμένας χεῖραςκαὶ τὰ παραλελυμέναγόνατα ἀνορθώσατε.
4 Verburg argued that G wrote κρίσιν ἀνταποδίδωσιν καὶ ἀνταποδώσει to enhance the theme of judgment, as elsewhere in Isaiah where ἀνταποδίδωμι appears in 35:8; 59:18; 66:6 (Verburg 2014). John’s Gospel alludes to Zechariah, which echoes Isaiah; John 12:15 reads μὴ φοβοῦ, θυγάτηρ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεται. Ignatius (Magn. 9) saw the phrase “he will come and save us” as a prophecy of Jesus. Irenaeus (Haer. 3.20) used the same expression to prove that we cannot save ourselves.
5 Many Christian authors (beginning with the Synoptic Gospels, and including Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Eusebius, Lactantius, Cyprian, Novatian, Tertullian, Hymenaeus, Irenaeus, Justin) used this prophecy to prove that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God.
6 The synoptic gospels allude to the blind seeing, lame walking, and deaf hearing. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke 7:22 has ὅτι τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται, just like Matthew, except for few conjunctions. Justin (Dial. 69; 12; 1Apol. 48) saw 35:1-7 as a prophecy of Jesus’ appearing and healing by his word. So did Irenaeus (Haer. 4.33.11), Tertullian (Answer to Jews 9; Marc. 4.10, 12, 24; Resurrection of the Flesh 20), Cyprian (Test. 2.7), Novatian (Trin. 9; 12), Lactantius (Inst. 4.15). Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.18) interpreted the healings in both physical and spiritual ways.
7 For εὐφροσύνη G probably read בנוה as רנה. G guessed ὀρνέων as the meaning of תנים (probably “jackals”), for which G has no consistent translation.
The redeemed will return with eternal happiness(35:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 35:3-4]]
8 Verburg argued that G translated מסלול ודרך as ὁδός καθαρὰ to harmonize with סלל translated as “cleanse” in 57:14 (Verburg 2014). Revelation 21:27 alludes to the absence of unclean things, but with almost no lexical commonalities: καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος εἰ μὴ οἱ γεγραμμένοι ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου. Tertullian (Marc. 4.24) saw 35:8 as the way of faith to reach God. In Res. 58, he said the “everlasting joy” comes after the resurrection.
9 Perhaps G read רע (“evil”) instead of פריץ (“violent”). According to Eusebius, the “redeemed” are those mentioned by 1 Peter 1:19, redeemed by Jesus’ precious blood.
10 Although normally ὑπέρ with the genitive indicates a subject matter, with κεφαλῆς it commonly means above, as in Deut 28:23; 2 Esdras 9:6; Jonah 4:6. Verburg suggested that the translation καὶ συνηγμένοι διὰ κύριον was influenced either by the antonym διασπείρω (as in 56:8) or by the theme of eschatological gathering as found for example in Isa 60 (Verburg 2014). Rev 21:4 alludes to the disappearance of sorrow without using any of the same vocabulary: καὶ ἐξαλείψει πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, [ὅτι] τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν. Marchalianus has σωτηρία where S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Zielger) read εὐφροσύνη.
1 Marshall Hurwitz argued that chapters 36-39 were translated by a different translator than the rest of Isaiah (Hurwitz 1957, 75–83), on the evidence that anthropomorphisms are reduced, and vocabulary equivalents are more consistent, than in the rest of Greek Isaiah. (See also Ashmore 1972; Catastini 1989; 1983b; 1983a). Konkel noted that both G and Kingdoms ἐπὶ τὰς πόλεις do not include an equivalent to Hebrew כל (Konkel 1993, 469).
3 The meaning of γραμματεύς is more than the “scribe” who was an expert in the law in the Gospels; it refers to a government-appointed recorder or clerk with authority in Exodus 5:6-19 and Acts 19:35. It appears in parallel with elders (Numbers 11:16) and is a military official in 1 Macc 5:42. Lust lists ὑπομνηματογράφος as a neologism but it is also reconstructed in a contemporary private letter (Witkowsky 1911, sec. 47). Muraoka said it is the “name of a great official in the Egyptian king’s household, and the corresponding official in the office of the minister of finance, and prob. in those of other high officials.”
4 This introductory formula τάδε λέγει expresses authority. In the scriptures it usually introduces divine words, but here the source of the words is ὁ βασιλεύς. This is not unprecedented. The first instance of the phrase actually has Joseph as the speaker (Genesis 45:9). A royal speaker (Pharaoh) also appears in Exodus 5:10. Others’ words introduced using this formula include Israel (Numbers 20:14) and Balak (Numbers 22:16). The interrogative pronoun Τί πεποιθὼς εἶ; asks about not the object of (which would use the dative Τινι or the prepositions ἐπί τινι, ἔν τινι, or εἴς τινα) but the reason for the confidence.
5 The negative μή indicates a rhetorical question expecting a negative answer (Porter 1992, sec. 18.2.1).
6 The subject of εἰσελεύσεται could be referent of ὃς ἂν ἐπʼ αὐτὴν ἐπιστηρισθῇ, or (if that relative pronoun is resumed by αὐτοῦ), the subject of εἰσελεύσεται could be the referent of αὐτήν in that same phrase, i.e., the direct object of that phrase. In the first case the meaning would be “Whoever leans on it, he will penetrate into his own hand.” In the second case it would be a Nominativus Pendens, “as for he who leans on it, it will penetrate his hand.” Certainly the latter interpretation fits the context better.
7 Arie van der Kooij argued that G wished to avoid contradicting the centralization law in Deuteronomy 12 (van der Kooij 2006b). Matt 27:43 echoes Isa 36:7’s claim of trusting God: πέποιθεν ἐπὶτὸνθεόν, ῥυσάσθω νῦν εἰ θέλει αὐτόν.
8 On the spelling of μίχθητε, see BDAG μίγνυμι/μιγνύω, which refers to BDF §23. Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it μείχθητε. In the New Testament, this verb is commonly used for mixing liquids, and by extension, mixing people. But the broader meaning of the verb is to bring things in contact with each other (in a neutral sense), and often in a hostile sense of an encounter in battle. The article is used in τῷ κυρίῳ, which does not refer to God.
10 The question with μή expects a negative answer (Porter 1992, secs. 18, 2.1). It wasn’t without (ἄνευ)Lord, implying that Lord commissioned Rapsakes to attack. The words Κύριος εἶπεν πρὸς με Ἀνάβηθι καὶ κατάφθειρον τὴν γῆν ταύτην are marked with marginal asterisks in Sinaiticus; these words are absent in the first-hand of Marchalianus, in Alexandrinus, and in the editions of Rahlfs and Ziegler; Vaticanus has Κύριος εἶπεν πρὸς μέ Ἀνάβηθι ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ταύτην καὶ διάφθειρον αὐτήν; the marginal note in Q records the reading of the Three, which is identical to that of B (except for the lack of a final nu on εἶπεν in Q’s margin).
11 The pronoun ἡμεῖς is redundant with ἀκούομεν, and is therefore emphatic. The emphasis does not come through in the translation “we understand it,” yet
“we ourselves understand it” would be an awkward overtranslation. The conjunction ἵνα does not introduce the clause that has λαλεῖς as its verb. If it were, we would expect to find a subjunctive form instead of the indicative λαλεῖς. Rather ἵνα τί is the question “why?” BDAG describes this usage under ἱνατί. It is common in LXX and appears also in 1 Cor 10:29; Matt 9:4; 27:46; Luke 13:7; Acts 4:25; 7:26. On the basis of 36:7, Justin Martyr attributed Psalm 110 to Hezekiah (Dial. 83). Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 5.14) found here evidence that the Lord is the God of all.
12 Twice we see κύριος with the article, when not referring to God. The first-hand of Q wrote the noun αἷμα; the iota was subsequently deleted to match the adverb ἅμα of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Neither Ziegler’s nor Swete’s apparatus lists Q’s first-hand reading.
13 The language spoken is here called “Judean.” In Josephus’ telling, the language is “Hebrew” (ἑβραϊστί, Ant. 10.8). The psychological effect would be greater if the people were also pressuring their king to surrender.
14 Rapsakes attempts to dissolve the relationship of trust between the people and their king. Instead of ἀπατάτω, the parallel in 4 Kingdoms 18:29 has ἐπαιρέτω.
15 Josephus summarized this part of the speech as δῆλον γὰρ ὡς τὸν λαὸν ὑμεῖς τε καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐλπίσι παρακρουόμενοι ματαίαις ἀντέχειν πείθετε (Ant. 10.9).
18 The earlier manuscript Rahlfs 902 supports the word order of Q, S, and A (ὑμᾶς ἀπατάτω) against B, and the word order of the original scribe of S (ὑμᾶς ῥύσεται) against Q, A, and B. The verb ῥύομαι has appeared only three times in Isaiah before chapter 36, where it appears seven times, and once again in 37:12. Thereafter it appears in chapters 44; 47-52; 54; 59; 63, but in those later instances it usually translates גאל. In this chapter it refers to the military protection a god provides. The plural subject ἐρρύσαντο οἱ θεοὶ shifts to the singular by means of the distributive pronoun ἕκαστος, so that τὴν ἑαυτοῦ is now singular.
19 The reader unfamiliar with the names Semar, Arphath, and Epphareniwould assume these are cities in Samaria. In Eusebius’s text, the spellings are Αἰμὰθ, Ἀρφάδ, and Ἐπφαρουέμ. There is no city named Amar, but the Hebrew Hamath is on the Orontes in Syria; Arpad is in northern Syria; Sepharvaim is on the Euphrates. Eusebius explained that the reason Samaria was destroyed is given here: they had turned to many gods, disbobeying their ancestral laws (2.10).
20 Matt 27:43 echoes the disparaging mockery that casts doubt on God’s willingness to save, in the words πέποιθεν ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, ῥυσάσθω νῦν εἰ θέλει αὐτόν.
No one answers Rapsakes(36:21)[[@Bible:Isa 36:22]]
21 Eusebius affirmed that silence is the appropriate response to blasphemers in times of persecution or public debates (2.10).
22 The plural τοὺς χιτῶνας probably refers not to a specific type of clothing (tunic, shirt), but to clothes generally, as also in Mark 14:63. However, in Mark, the verb is not σχίζω but διαρήσσω.
1 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah substituted sackcloth for his royal clothing to signify his misery and distress, and because of this humilty, God responded with compassion and mercy (2.11).
2 The verb ἀπέστειλεν is singular, with Hezekiah still as its subject. The people he sends are described with the plural participle περιβεβλημένους σάκκους, which is the phrase picked up by Revelation 11:3, Καὶ δώσω τοῖς δυσὶν μάρτυσίν μου καὶ προφητεύσουσιν ἡμέρας χιλίας διακοσίας ἑξήκοντα περιβεβλημένοι σάκκους.
3 The earlier manuscript 902 does not include ἡ before σήμερον. According to Eusebius, Hezekiah referred to himself only by name, not by title “the king” because the humble occasion did not permit it (οὐ γὰρ ὁ καιρὸς αὐτῷ τοῦτ’ ἐπέτρεπε λέγειν ταπεινουμένῳ τῆς παρούσης ἕνεκα συμφορᾶς, 2.11).
4 The phrase καὶδεηθήσῃπρὸςΚύριοντὸνθεόν σου is absent in A, and corrector cb2 also deleted it from S, indicating a very close relationship between A and Scb2, since the omission in A is likely due to parablepsis involving σου. Corrector cb3 later reinstated the phrase. Rahlfs and Ziegler spell καταλελιμμένων as καταλελειμμένων. The verb δέομαι (which forms its future as δεηθήσομαι and refers to requesting) is not to be confused with δέω (which forms its aorist passive as δεθῆναι and refers to binding). The vowel cluster εη in δεηθήσῃ does not contract because the root was originally *δεϝ, as evidenced by the Homeric form δεύομαι.Justin Martyr (Dial. 83) appeals to this verse in his argument that Psalm 110 should be applied not to Hezekiah but to Christ.
5 Since the servants of the king are reported to have come to Isaiah but not to have said anything, Eusebius inferred that Isaiah anticipated their words (2.11). The original scribe of Marchalianus mistakenly wrote τοῦ βασιλέως τοῦ βασιλέως, before catching the error and deleting the redundant words.
6 Here τὸν κύριον does not refer to God, and therefore has an article.
7 Where our manuscript and Alexandrinus (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read the future form ἐμβαλῶ, S (ἐνβάλλω) and B (ἐμβάλλω ) have the present form. The translation “when he hears a message he will return” indicates not simultaneous action (which would be “while he hears a message”) but consequent action, reflecting the perfective semantics of the Greek aorist.
8 In place of Λομνά (which is the reading Ziegler adopted), B has Λόβναν, A has Λόβνα, and S (Rahlfs) has Λόμναν; according to Q’s margins, the Three have Λαβανά. The subject of κατέλαβεν πολιορκοῦντα τὸν βασιλέα Λομνά is Rapsakes, and the object is τὸν βασιλέα, modified by πολιορκοῦντα, which has Λομνά as its object. In other words, Rapsakes left Jerusalem and rejoined the Assyrian king while the king was beseiging Lomna.
9 G moved Θαράθα βασιλεὺς Αἰθιόπων into the subordinate clause. The Hebrew says “he heard concerning Tirhakah the king of Cush, saying, ‘He has set out to fight against you.’” His consequent departure means any communication to Jerusalem must now be in writing.
11 The use of the particle ὡς here is described in BDAG ①ⓑδ. The phrase ἐξηγοῦντο ὡς in Luke 24:35 corresponds to English “they told how;” similarly, Luke 8:47 ἀπήγγειλεν ὡς, where the woman told them “that” she was healed, and Luke 25:53 ἐθεάσαντο ὡς, where the women saw “how” his body was placed.
12 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding the proper name that in our manuscript is spelled Θαιμάν. Ottley noted, “The following proper name, Θαιμὰδ A, Θεεμὰθ B, Θαιμὰν Q, may have been conjecturally altered: but the LXX. spelling of unfamiliar proper names is so erratic, that no inference can, as a rule, be drawn from it” (1904, 1:2:288).
13 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding Ἀμάρ and Ἀρφάδ.
15 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah confidently trusted in the prophet’s sacred promises and sent up the following theologically rich prayer.
16 Acts 4:24 echoes Hezekiah’s address, with the words δέσποτα, σὺ ὁ ποιήσαςτὸνοὐρανὸνκαὶτὴνγῆν καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς. It is clear that the indeclinable noun χερουβείμ is genitive because of the preceding τῶν.
17 G refrained from the anthropomorphisms involving God’s “ear” and “eyes;” The Hebrew says, “Yahweh, extend your ear and hear! Yahweh, open your eyes and see!”
18 The prepositional phrase ἐπʼ ἀληθείας appears also in the New Testament, modifying the expressions “you teach the way of God” (Matt 12:14; Luke 20:21) “you have said” (Mark 12:32); “I tell you” (Luke 4:25); “this man was with him” (Luke 22:59); also Acts 4:27; 10:34. It usually appears near the beginning of a sentence and corresponds to “in truth” or “truly.”
19 The plural form ξύλα is typically used when wood is the substance, the building material. Galatians 4:8 echoes the image of not being gods: Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσιν θεοῖς.
20 The expression θεὸς μόνος is used by Novatian (Trinity 30). This phrase is rare in the LXX, appearing in 4 Kgdms 19:15;
Ps 85:10b; Isa 37:16, 20; 2 Macc 7:37; 4 Macc 5:24. John 5:44 uses it in the question τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ οὐ ζητεῖτε;.
21 G read the ambiguous וישלח as a passive rather than the active (as it is pointed in the MT). G added ἤκουσα, which does appear in 4 Kingdoms 19:20, however there it is at the end of the verse, where it is also in the Hebrew of 2 Kings 19:20.
22 The phrase περὶαὐτοῦ indicates the topic of the prophecy is Sennachereim; he is the addressee. Because θυγάτηρ is not vocative but nominative, the virgin daughter Zion and daughter Jerusalem are the subject rather than the addressee of the verb. Eusebius confirms this with his interpretation, ἡ δὲ θαρσοῦσα τῇ ἑαυτῆς καθαρότητι καὶ τῷ ἑαυτῆς βοηθῷ θεῷ τὸν ὑπερήφανόν σου λογισμὸν καὶ τὰς ἀπειλὰς ἐκείνας ἐξεφαύλισε καὶ ἐμυκτήρισεν ὡς οὐδενὸς ἀξίας (2.13). The phrase ἐπὶ σοὶ κεφαλὴν ἐκίνησεν has a parallel in Mark 15:29||Matt 27:39 and Sirach 12:18; 13:7 (τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ κινήσει ἐπὶ σοί). It is an act of derision; BDAG says this usage appears in Homer. Jerusalem is thumbing her nose at Sennachereim.
23 The rhetorical questions refer to the arrogance the Assyrians showed to the Judeans.
24 The Holy One of Israel accuses the Assyrians of boasting of their military accomplishments.
25 Michael van der Meer demonstrated that γέφυρα refers to not a dam but a bridge. He argued that G had in mind the specific bridge over the Euphrates in Babylon. G read קור as קרה and מצור as from צור (van der Meer 2008a, 233–34). Eusebius preferred to expound the version of Symmachus, “I dug and I drank water and laid waste, stopping up all rivers with my footprint,” and claimed that these words recall the rivers obliterated by Assyria, and symbolize the many nations who thought they had their gods’ support (2.13).
26 According to Eusebius, God takes the credit for the Assyrians’ victories by withdrawing his protection from the cities he had formerly defended because of their profane behaviour (2.13).
27 Eusebius explained that the comparison is with grass which does not bear fruit because the people did not bear the good fruit of godliness (2.13).
28 The “going out and coming in” refer, in Eusebius’ interpretation, to the Assyrian king’s reasonings (2.13).
29 Theodoret alluded to the hook and bit of 27:29 in describing the death of Cyril (Ep. 180).
Sennachereim will turn back the way he came(37:30-35)[[@Bible:Isa 37:21]]
31 Gregory Nazianzen alluded to the seed and root of 37:31, in Orat. 21.24.
32 According to Eusebius, those left in Jerusalem will be saved (διασωθήσονται οἱ ἐπὶ τῆς Ἰερουσαλὴμ καταλειφθέντες) if they bear fruit (2.13).
33 A fourfold image emphatically asserts the Assyrians’ failure to enter, shoot, and beseige Jerusalem. The Shepherd of Hermas uses χάραξ to denote a fence (Similitudes V, iv, 1 and V, v, 5).
34 Lord asserts that the Assyrians will instead go back home.
35 Eusebius claimed that no one else would prevail against the city either, because of God’s protection (2.13), and for David’s sake, so that people will imitate his love of God.
36 G used the third person plural εὗρον for והנה, but in Hebrew the discoverer of the deaths is left unspecified; likewise Eusebius used the passive form of the verb, thereby obsuring the identity of the discoverers (2.13).
37 Eusebius made no comment on Sennachereim’s death. Instead of καὶ ἀποστραφείς ἀπῆλθεν, 4 Kingdoms 19:36 has καὶ ἀπῆρεν καὶ ἐπορεύθη καὶ ἀπέστρεψεν.
38 According to Hatch and Redpath, πάτραρχον is a corruption of the loanword πάταχρος from Aramaic פְּתַכְרָא. Ziegler said the Aramaic spelling פַכְתָרָא indicates πάταχρα is the correct spelling in Isa 8:21 and πάταχρον in Isa 37:38 (1939, 81). This Aramaic word is used in Targums of Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5; and Isaiah 8:21.
1 Eusebius connected God’s power over life and death as expressed in the preceding story with his power over life and death in Hezekiah’s illness, quoting Deut 32:39 (I kill and give life). Instead of ἐμαλακίσθη Ἑζεκίας ἕως θανάτου and Τάξαι περὶ τοῦ οἴκου σου, 4 Kingdoms has ἠρρώστησεν εἰς θάνατον and Ἔντειλαι τῷ οἴκῳ.
2 According to Eusebius, the reason this story is recorded is to show that God is in control of fate (ἀνάγκη), all existence, and nature (2.14). It shows that although it might seem to humans that one’s end is near, God is the one who determines one’s time of death.
3 The expression ἐν καρδίᾳ ἀληθινῇ conveys the way Hezekiah lived, as Eusebius explained: ἀγαθῇ συνειδήσει τοῦ μετὰ ἀληθείας καὶ ἐν καρδίᾳ ἀληθινῇ εὐαρέστως αὐτῷ βεβιωκέναι (2.14). Hebrews 10:22 echoes the image of the true heart in the words προσερχώμεθα μετὰ ἀληθινῆς καρδίας. The papyrus in the national library at Vienna numbered G 2320 includes text from Isaiah 38:3-5 (Wessely 1909). This manuscript dates from the third century CE, and Rahlfs gave it the siglum 948 (Rahlfs and Fraenkel 2004, 393–94).
7 Luke 2:12 echoes the formula for a miraculous sign, in the announcement of Jesus’ birth to the shepherds, καὶ τοῦτο ὑμῖν τὸσημεῖον, εὑρήσετε βρέφος ἐσπαργανωμένον καὶ κείμενον ἐν φάτνῃ.
8 Codex Vaticanus moves ὁ ἥλιος from before τοὺς to after σου. Hippolytus, Isaiah, refers to this instance of the sun stopping, along with that of Joshua. Gregory Nazianzen Oration 18 mentions the miracle of Hezekiah’s extended life, signified by the shadow turning back.
10 Eusebius called this not a prayer but a “word of gratitude” (λόγον εὐχαριστήριον, 2.14). It does not appear in 4 Kingdoms. As Ottley noted, καταλείψω is an unusual translation of פקד.
11 Eusebius added, “And while I reflected on these things, I said to myself: may I never be found unworthy of life with God after death and of the portion of the living who abide with him and thereafter the salvation of God.” In his view, Hezekiah wanted to make sure that after death he would see a man of God and rest with the blessed souls. Eusebius claimed that Hezekiah had no child at this point, so was distressed at the end of the line of succession (2.14).
12 The noun πνεῦμα could refer to breath or spirit. In either case the image is of one’s life departing. The prepositional phrase παρʼ ἐμοί conveys location: with or beside. The verb ἐγένετο normally indicates not just being but becoming. The noun ἱστός could be anything standing upright, so prototypically a pole. But one technical meaning is the beam of a loom. In connection with ἐρίθου, that is the preferred meaning, because while ἔριθος prototypically means servant, in this case the genitive participle ἐγγιζούσης indicates that the genitive noun ἐρίθου is also feminine, indicating a spinster.
13 Swete and Ziegler place ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ παρεδόθην in verse 13 with what follows; Rahlfs put them in verse 12.
14 The verb μελετάω according to the lexicons typically means to take care, to practice, cultivate. In Isaiah, however, it almost always is audible. In Isa 16:7 it is absolute, in parallel with ὀλολύζω; in 59:3 lips do it, in parallel with λαλέω; in 59:13 it is in parallel with λαλέω and κύω (impregnate/conceive). In 27:8 ὁ μελετῶν τῷ πνεύματι refers to scheming. In 33:18 it has an accusative object: one’s soul μελετήσει φόβον. Within this semantic range, the only action that a dove might perform is audible. Eusebius confirms that constant moaning or muttering is meant, when he elaborates, ὡς περιστερὰ ἐμελέτων ἀποκλαόμενος, εὐχομένου δέ μού φησιν ἐπιμόνως καὶ ἐγκειμένου τῇ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἱκετηρίᾳ (2.14).
15 Rahlfs began verse 15 with καὶ ἀφείλατό μου. Swete and Ziegler put these words in verse 14. Ziegler put τὴν ὀδύνην τῆς ψυχῆς in verse 15; Swete kept these words in verse 14, with no verse 15. The noun ὀδύνη normally refers to pain, whether of body or mind. Eusebius interpreted this phrase in light of Psalm 56:13, τὴν ψυχήν μου ἐρρύσατο ἐκ θανάτου, implying that the “pain” of the soul is the death of the soul.
16 For ἀνηγγέλη and καὶ ἐξήγειράς G read one Hebrew word (יחיו, “they live”) two ways: both as יחוו, “they declared” and as וחיתני, “you enlivened me,” and for σοι לך instead of ולכל. G did nothing with “among them” (בהמה in 1QIsaa).
17 Swete spelled ἀπέρριψας as ἀπέριψας. The form εἵλου is the second person singular of the aorist middle indicative (the first person is εἱλόμην) of αἱρέω, which in the middle refers to choosing.
18 According to Eusebius, the reason those in Hades will not praise God is not because this is the place of the dead but because this is the place of the ungodly (2.14).
19 Athanasius alluded to the inability of the dead to praise God in Ep. fest. 7.3. Origen quoted 38:19 as an example of miraculous begetting in one’s old age, in Cels. 8.46. Jerome used 38:19 to show Hezekiah was married (Jov. 1.5).
20 Athanasius quoted 38:20 in Ep. fest. 10.3 (see also Chrysostom, Hom. Rom. 18). He referred to the word for “make” to demonstrate that begetting can be called making (C. Ar. 2.4).
21 Methodius quoted 38:21, calling the fig the fruit of the Holy Spirit (Discourse 10.5).
22 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah did not want the cake to be a sign of healing, so he said the sign would be him going up to the house of God. For Hezekiah, the wound was of no consequence in comparison with going up to God’s house (2.14).
1 The agreement between chapter 39 and 4 Kingdoms 20:12-19 is a bit greater than half of the words. The phrase Ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ is a literal translation of בעת ההיא (as 1QIsaa spells it). G used this phrase previously in 38:1 where the Hebrew is בימיםההם, and in 18:7 where the Hebrew is בעתההיא. The Hebrew בעתההיא appears also in 20:2 but there it is translated as τότε. For Μαιωδάχ, 4 Kgdms 20:12 has Μαρωδαχβαλαδαν. The nominative υἱός, in apposition to Μαιωδάχ, indicates that this is the subject. For Λααδάν B and 4 Kgdms 20:12 have Βαλαδάν. The article indicates this is a genitive, so the βασιλεύς refers to Μαιωδάχ, not Λααδάν. Βαβυλωνίας is used only in Isa 11:11; 14:23; 39:7; three times in 1 Esdras (4:53; 6:16; 8:13); and 2 Macc 8:20; 3 Macc 6:6. The mascuiline form appears in 2 Esdr 4.9; Ep. Jer 1; Bel 3, 23, 28. The plural ἐπιστολάς indicates that multiple letters were sent. The name Ἑζεκία is absent in B; 4 Kgdms has πρὸς Εζεκιαν. The verb ἀνέστη is not the expected translation of חזק. Typically ἀνίστημι is used for resurrection from death, but only rarely for recovery from illness (LSJ lists only Herodotus Hist. 1.22.4 and Thucydides Hist. 2.49.8). The explanation for this translation is not likely because the Greek translator thought Hezekiah had actually died. Eusebius did not take it that way; he called the recovery simply ἐκ τῆς νόσου σωτηρίαν (2.15).
2 The referent of αὐτοῖς is the πρέσβεις. The adverbial accusative χαρὰν μεγάλην is absent in B; it is included in 4 Kgdms. Matt 2:10 uses a similar phrase, ἰδόντες δὲ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐχάρησαν χαρὰνμεγάλην σφόδρα. After νεχωθά B also includes καὶ τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου (see below), with 4 Kgdms, which also includes τὰ ἀρώματα καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον τὸ ἀγαθόν, καὶ τὸν οἶκον. In both this case and in 4 Kdgms 20:13 the Hebrew נכתה is transliterated. LEH refers to P. N. Simotas, Αἱ ἀμετάφραστοι λέξεις ἐν τῷ κειμένῳ τῶν O’, Τhessaloniki, 1968. HALOT traces the Hebrew בֵּית נְכֹתֹה “treasure-house” to Akkadian bīt nakāmti.
The noun θυμίαμα is used commonly in the plural for incense. After μύρου B lacks καὶ τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου, but has them earlier. There is no corresponding word in Hebrew translated as γάζης. Γάζα refers to the royal treasury, as in Acts 8:27.
3 In this instance of τί and the next, the question is “what” rather than “why.” The present tense λέγουσιν is unexpected because it translates אָמְרוּ, a qatal form. The perfect form ἥκασιν is used, even though ἥκω inherently has a perfect sense already. Normally in the LXX (almost ten times as often) בא is translated by ἔρχομαι, but ἥκω is the next most common rendering. However, in Isaiah, ἔρχομαι (32 times), and ἥκω (30 times) are used with roughly equal frequency. Note that in both the 4 Kgdms version and here the same unusual rendering is chosen, even though 4 Kgdms strongly prefers ἔρχομαι or παραγίνομαι, indicating the translation of Isaiah influenced that of Kingdoms.
4 The form εἴδοσαν is from εἶδον, not οἶδα. The phrase ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ does not have a counterpart in the Hebrew.
6 Instead of simply ἔρχονται (the reading also of S, B, and 4 Kgdms), A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has ἔρχονται, λέγει κύριος. The subject of λήμψονται is unspecified, but in context it must be the Babylonians. The object of ἥξει is ὅσα συνήγαγον. The form καταλίπωσιν is from καταλείπω, “leave behind.”
7 The aorist reading ἐγέννησας is also in S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has the future γεννήσεις, with 4 Kgdms, reflecting the Hebrew yiqtol form תּוֹלִיד. The noun σπάδων refers to one who is castrated (LSJ). 4 Kgdms has εὐνοῦχος instead.
Hezekiah’s response(39:8)[[@Bible:Isa 39:5-8]]
8 Instead of the middle γενέσθω (the reading also of A and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the passive γενηθήτω; 4 Kgdms has ἔστω. Justin, Dial. 50.3 said 39:8 refers “to the office of forerunner discharged by John the Baptist and prophet before this our Lord Jesus Christ.” The text of Justin matches that of Q and A (lacking only the particle δὴ): Καὶ εἶπεν Ἐζεκίας πρὸς Ἠσαΐαν, Ἀγαθὸς ὁ λόγος κυρίου, ὃν ἐλάλησε· Γενέσθω εἰρήνη καὶ δικαιοσύνη ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις μου.
Justin Martyr saw no break between chapters 39 and 40, quoting 39:8 and 40:1-17 as if Hezekiah spoke it all (Dial. 50). He claimed Isaiah foretold John. Eusebius noticed the various parts of the book of Isaiah, yet maintained that one prophet was responsible for the whole. In his Comm. Isa. 1.4 he wrote, “The reader should notice that the book as a whole appears to have been joined together into a unity, and [that the message] was delivered by the prophet in parts over the duration of several lengthy intervals of time, so that [the book appears] to offer little precise information about the [events that] are to arise. [Isaiah wrote in this fashion in order that] the interpretation of the [prophecies] recorded therein [could be] determined after a while and [so that] the prophecy [would also be] applicable to the events that occurred during each kingdom.” The text of chapter 40 is relatively free of variants among the uncials. Many verses exhibit no differences.
1 Outside of the Bible παρακαλέω usually refers to persuasion, but as Bieringer noted, in addition to translating נחם as παρακαλέω 15 times where it means “comfort,” G introduced παρακαλέω 12 times with the meaning “comfort,” thereby making even more prevalent a theological point that is already present in Isaiah (Bieringer 2008). Luke 2:25 alludes to the comforting of Israel with the following description of Simeon: ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ εὐλαβὴς προσδεχόμενος παράκλησιν τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, καὶ πνεῦμα ἦν ἅγιον ἐπʼ αὐτόν.
2 The plural form ἱερεῖς is the vocative of ἱερεύς. The Hebrew does not specify the addressees, so as Ziegler noted (1934, 71) the Greek makes the command to apprise the people of the restoration into a command to priests. Kim found in this transformation evidence that G worked in a priest-centred community, namely the Temple of Onias (2009, 198). The phrase λαλήσατε εἰς τὴν καρδίαν is a literal translation of דברו על לב. The verb πίμπλημι (ἐπλήσθη) is not usually used for completion of time, except in the first two chapters of Luke’s gospel (1:23, 57; 2:6, 21, 22), but this usage is attested in inscriptions (see LSJ πίμπλημι I.4). So is the usage of complete a prescribed experience (LSJ πίμπλημι I.5), which is what we see here. G untypically uses λέλυται for רצה “redeem,” which is most commonly translated as προσδέξασθαι. The sense is that the obligation has been released and discharged. Ottley pointed to Aristophanes Frogs 691 λῦσαι τὰς πρότερον ἁμαρτίας. Revelation 1:5 alludes to the release from sins in the words, Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ. For the singular עונה G has the singular ἁμαρτία, but for חטאתיה, which is still singular, he has the plural ἁμαρτήματα. Elsewhere in the Old Greek, the Hebrew עָוֺן would more commonly become ἀδικία or ἀνομία, but G prefers ἁμαρτία. The standard translation for חַטָּאת is ἁμαρτία as well, but because G already used that for עָוֺן he chose a different form of the same root. The neuter plural accusative adjective διπλᾶ is used in an adverbial sense, “doubly.” Muraoka (GELS, s.v. δέχομαι) glossed this phrase as receiving ‘the double portion of the penalty for her sins at the hands of the Lord.’ Revelation 18:6 alludes to the double punishment: ἀπόδοτε αὐτῇ ὡς καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπέδωκεν καὶ διπλώσατε τὰ διπλᾶ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῆς, ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ ᾧ ἐκέρασεν κεράσατε αὐτῇ διπλοῦν. Origen (Comm. Matt. 13.30) said God punishes more than is deserved. Hermas Vis. 1.3-4 uses this text to claim all barriers to God’s promises will be removed.
3 The mismatched genders in φωνὴ βοῶντος make it impossible for the participle to modify the noun as it might in Hebrew, where קול קורא is masculine, and the state of קול is ambiguous: either in the construct state (yielding a genitive construction, as in G) or in the absolute state “a voice calling.” Mark 1:3 quotes the scriptures explicitly only in one verse, at Mark 1:3: φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ. Matt 3:3 and Luke 3:4 are identical. John 1:23 has φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου. Menken concluded that John quoted from the LXX, and changed Ἑτοιμάσατε to Εὐθύνατε under influence from the next line of Isa 40:3, and that
the change was motivated by a desire to make John not a predecessor but a contemporary witness to Jesus (Menken 1985). Barnabas 9.3 has Ἀκούσατε, τέκνα, φωνῆς βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. Justin Martyr (Dial. 50) claimed Isaiah foretold John. Origen argued that Isaiah says John is “an angel who assumed a body for the sake of bearing witness to the light” (Comm. Jo. 2.25). Victorinus connected the image of Mark as a lion with this “voice of one calling in the wilderness” (Comm. Rev. 4:7-10). Cyprian quoted 40:3-5 to show that Christ is God (Test. 2.6).
4 In G φάραγξ is the opposite of a mountain or hill; i.e., a valley. But in broader literature the usual meaning for φάραγξ is something smaller and steeper, something from which escape is difficult; something in which things can be thrown, something that can be filled, i.e., a chasm or ravine. φάραγξ is the most common rendering of the Hebrew גיא (also in 22:1, 5; Zec 14:5; Jer 7:32). The pair πληρωθήσεται … ταπεινωθήσεται recalls ἐπλήσθη ἡ ταπείνωσις from 40:2. The adjective σκολιός literally means crooked, and carries a figurative meaning similar to “crooked” in English. Note the difference between ὁδοὺς λείας (the reading also of A and S corrector ca, followed by Ziegler) and πεδία (Q’s margin, S*, B, followed by Rahlfs). Aquila and Symmachus have πεδία, the normal translation of בקעה. ὁδοὺς λείας is inexplicable unless it is the original reading. Luke 3:5-6 continues the quotation, πᾶσα φάραγξ πληρωθήσεται καὶ πᾶν ὄρος καὶ βουνὸς ταπεινωθήσεται, καὶ ἔσται τὰ σκολιὰ εἰς εὐθείαν καὶ αἱ τραχεῖαι εἰς ὁδοὺς λείας· καὶ ὄψεται πᾶσα σὰρξ τὸ σωτήριον τοῦ θεοῦ. Pss. Sol. 11:4 speaks of flattening mountains into level ground: ὄρη ὑψηλὰ ἐταπείνωσεν εἰς ὁμαλισμὸν αὐτοῖς, οἱ βουνοὶ ἐφύγοσαν ἀπὸ εἰσόδου αὐτῶν and 8:17 ὡμάλισαν ὁδοὺς τραχείας ἀπὸ εἰσόδου αὐτοῦ. Sib. Or. 3.680 likewise has ἠλιβάτους κορυφάς τʼ ὀρέων βουνούς τε πελώρων ῥήξει. Asssumption of Moses 10.4 speaks of high mountains brought low. Baruch 5:7 alludes to the leveling: συνέταξεν γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ταπεινοῦσθαι πᾶν ὄρος ὑψηλὸν καὶ θῖνας ἀενάους καὶ φάραγγας πληροῦσθαι εἰς ὁμαλισμὸν τῆς γῆς, ἵνα βαδίσῃ Ισραηλ ἀσφαλῶς τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ δόξῃ. The apocryphal Later Apocalypse of John 1 quotes 40:4 as referring to the cleansing of the earth at the eschaton.
5 The idiom πᾶσασὰρξ is a literal translation of כולבשר. Simeon’s prayer alludes to seeing God’s salvation in Luke 2:30: ὅτι εἶδον οἱ ὀφθαλμοί μου τὸσωτήριόν σου. Acts 28:28 uses an identical phrase to allude to the salvation of God for all people: γνωστὸν οὖν ἔστω ὑμῖν ὅτι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπεστάλη τοῦτο τὸσωτήριοντοῦθεοῦ· αὐτοὶ καὶ ἀκούσονται. Theodoret said Isaiah foretells “all flesh shall see the salvation of God.” (Eranistes 2).
6 The phrase Φωνὴ λέγοντος recalls the Φωνὴ βοῶντος from 40:3. The first person form εἶπα is unexpected; it reflects the first person singular אקרא. Previously, the priests were addressed; here the imperative is singular. The speaker is assumed to be the prophet. The extent of the prophet’s speech beginning with Τί βοήσω is not specified. The third person reference to God indicates that the speech continues to the end of verse 8; the other manuscripts (S, A, and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) further indicate this continuity with a first-person pronoun in τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν. The subject of the verbless clause Πᾶσα σὰρξ χόρτος is the more definite Πᾶσα σὰρξ. The time reference is gnomic: something true as a rule. Similarly, the subject of the verbless clause πᾶσα δόξα ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου is the more definite πᾶσα δόξα. James 1:10 alludes to the ephemeral nature of flowering grass: ὁ δὲ πλούσιος ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ὡςἄνθοςχόρτου παρελεύσεται. Cyprian (Hab. virg. 6) used 40:6 to say it is vain to adorn the flesh, but also that no one should be made sad by death, in Test. 3.58. Theodotus (Excerpt 11) used 40:6 to argue that what deserves dread is not disease but sins. Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.3, 19) used 40:6 to say the flesh should be kept in subjection, “sitting on the grass.” Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 10 reads: “Eva credidit et exivit de aqua fluminis et caro eius erat sicut herba de frigore aquae.”
7 The aorist forms ἐξηράνθη … ἐξέπεσεν were chosen because of the qatal form of יבשׁ and נבל, not because the aorist is the appropriate tense for gnomic statements. Eusebius recongnized the gnomic meaning when he said, ταῦτα μὲν καθολικώτερον ἐδίδαξεν ἡ προφητεία (2.16). The active of ξηραίνω means dry out, and the passive corresponds roughly to the English “dry up” or “wither.” 1Peter 1:24 quotes this as διότι πᾶσασὰρξ ὡςχόρτοςκαὶπᾶσαδόξα αὐτῆς ὡςἄνθοςχόρτου· ἐξηράνθηὁχόρτοςκαὶτὸἄνθοςἐξέπεσεν. James 1:11 continues quoting from the preceding verse, ἀνέτειλεν γὰρ ὁ ἥλιος σὺν τῷ καύσωνι καὶ ἐξήρανεν τὸν χόρτον καὶτὸἄνθος αὐτοῦ ἐξέπεσεν καὶ ἡ εὐπρέπεια τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἀπώλετο.
8 The future tense of μενεῖ reflects the yiqtol form יקום. It could have been read as a Greek present tense, since only the accent distinguishes the present from the liquid future of μένω. Matt 24:35 alludes to the permanence of God’s word, but with no significant words in common with Isaiah: ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ παρελεύσεται, οἱ δὲ λόγοι μου οὐ μὴ παρέλθωσιν. Luke 21:33 uses almost the same words as Matthew, except παρελεύσεται for παρελεύσονται and παρέλθωσιν for παρελεύσονται. 1 Peter 1:25 continues quoting, τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα κυρίου μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
10 Q and the great uncials SAB all have κυρίας “lady” without an epsilon; Rahlfs and Ziegler have κυριείας “lordship,” which could be spelled the same. Revelation 22:12 alludes to the Lord coming with his recompense, and to deeds: Ἰδοὺἔρχομαι ταχύ, καὶὁμισθός μουμετʼ ἐμοῦ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ ὡς τὸἔργον ἐστὶν αὐτοῦ. Revelation 22:7 does not share much in common with Isa 40:10, but the commonalities with Rev 22:12 indicate the seer had Isaiah in mind there too: καὶ ἰδοὺἔρχομαι ταχύ. μακάριος ὁ τηρῶν τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου.
11 The Greek ποιμὴν ποιμανεῖ τὸ ποίμνιον alliterates even more than the Hebrew כרועה עדרו ירעה (the Greek has π, μ, ν in three words; Hebrew has ר and ע in the same three). But the replicated alliteration need not be intentional; the words G chose are the standard equivalents of those three Hebrew words. The phrase ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσας could not have the same referent as the masculine subjects of the verbs ποιμανεῖ and συνάξει, αὐτοῦ, so this phrase must describe the object of παρακαλέσει: he comforts the pregnant sheep. Isaiah 40:1 is recalled by παρακαλέσει.
12 The verb ἐμέτρησεν is from μετρέω “measure.” The dative τῇ χειρὶ is instrumental. The σπιθαμή is the span from the thumb to little finger of a spread hand. A δράξ is a hand or more specifically, a handful. A σταθμός generally refers to something standing: station, post, or in this case, a balance for weighing things (LSJ σταθμός III). A νάπη is a wooded valley, which is the opposite of the Hebrew גבעה, “hill.” A ζυγός is not only a yoke, but also a balance for weighing things (as in Rev 6:5).
13 The aorist tense ἔγνω corresponds to the Hebrew qatal. The Hebrew uses a verbless clause where G has ἐγένετο. Presumably the aorist was chosen to match ἔγνω. The form συμβιβᾷ is from συμβιβάζω, which normally means “bring together” or “infer,” but here these meanings do not fit. The Pentateuch used συμβιβάζω for teaching (Exod 4:15 and Deut 4:9), which fits the context here. The future is normally συμβιβάσω, but the Attic form is συμβιβῶ, used also in Ps 31:8. The Hebrew tense of יודיע is yiqtol. Paul quoted Isa 40:13 twice. In 1 Cor 2:16 he wrote, τίς γὰρ ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου, ὃς συμβιβάσει αὐτόν; ἡμεῖς δὲ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν. In Rom 11:34 he wrote, τίς γὰρ ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου; ἢ τίς σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο;
14 The verb συμβουλεύω in the active means give advice; in the middle (συνεβουλεύσατο) it means seek advice: From whom did he seek advice, and they instructed him? See the note on συμβιβάζω in verse 13. The form ἔδειξεν is an aorist of δείκνυμι. In this context, κρίσιν implies correct judgment, in parallel with ὁδὸν συνέσεως.
15 The particple εἰ could be an interjection (LSJ A), or marker of a strong assertion (BDAG 4). A σταγών is a drop (of liquid). A κάδος is a jar for liquid. The noun ῥοπή refers to the tipping movement of a scale, or the weight used to do so. Metaphorically, it symbolizes the decisive moment (in which the scales are tipped); here it is used in reference to the instantaneous nature of this movement. The form σίελος is an alternate form of σίελον, spittle.
16 The implication of Lebanon (known for its trees) not being “sufficient” (ἱκανός) for burning, in the context of τετράποδα and ὁλοκαύτωσιν, is that not even it could provide enough firewood for an offering suitable for God.
17 Acts 19:27 alludes to being reckoned as nothing when referring to the temple of Artemis: οὐ μόνον δὲ τοῦτο κινδυνεύει ἡμῖν τὸ μέρος εἰς ἀπελεγμὸν ἐλθεῖν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῆς μεγάλης θεᾶς Ἀρτέμιδος ἱερὸν εἰςοὐθὲνλογισθῆναι, μέλλειν τε καὶ καθαιρεῖσθαι τῆς μεγαλειότητος αὐτῆς ἣν ὅλη ἡ Ἀσία καὶ ἡ οἰκουμένη σέβεται.
18 The aorists ὡμοιώσατε do not match the Hebrew yiqtol forms of דמה and ערך, respectively. The noun ὁμοιώματι is cognate with the two verbs in this verse, as the Hebrew דמות is with the first of the verbs. As Bartsch noted (Bartsch 1959), Mark 4:30 uses the same verb when introducing a parable via a rhetorical question, Πῶς ὁμοιώσωμεν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. Acts echoes the incomparable nature of God: γένος οὖν ὑπάρχοντες τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ὀφείλομεν νομίζειν χρυσῷ ἢ ἀργύρῳ ἢ λίθῳ, χαράγματι τέχνης καὶ ἐνθυμήσεως ἀνθρώπου, τὸ θεῖον εἶναι ὅμοιον.
19 The particle μή expects a negative answer to the rhetorical question: Has a craftsman made his image? Note the alliteration with χρυσ- in χρυσοχόος χωνεύσας χρυσίον περιεχρύσωσεν. None of the Hebrew words behind this phrase are cognates. Χρυσοχόος is a goldsmith; χωνεύω is contracted from χοᾰνεύω, to cast (metal); περιχρυσόω is to enclose with gold, whether by gilding or mounting. The verb κατασκευάζω means to make ready; in this case to construct it (LSJ 3). The clause χρυσοχόοςχωνεύσαςχρυσίονπεριεχρύσωσεναὐτόν has a main verb (the gilding) and an aorist participle (the smelting). The action of the (bounded) aorist participle takes place before the main verb.
20 The adjective ἄσηπτος means either not liable to decomposition, or undecayed. Both senses are applicable here. The form σοφῶς is the adverb of σοφός. What is sought (ζητεῖ) is information (BDAG ζητέω 2). The combination καὶ ἵνα is a bit awkward; here the καί makes more sense as an adverb than as a conjunction. The passive of σαλεύω means “be shaken.”
21 The futures γνώσεσθε and ἀκούσεσθε reflect the Hebrew yiqtol. The aorists ἀνηγγέλη and ἔγνωτε reflect the Hebrew qatal.
22 The participle κατέχων reflects the Hebrew participle יֹּשֵׁב. A γῦρος is a ring or circle. The subject shifts to the plural (οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες): the inhabitants of the world are like grasshoppers to him. The ἀκρίς is the desert locust, schistocerca gregaria. The singular subject resumes with ὁ στήσας. A καμάρα
implies a vaulted ceiling, with arches. The object of διατείνω is the sky: he stretches the sky out like a tent.
23 The particple διδοὺς (of δίδωμι) reflects the Hebrew participle. The preposition εἰς indicates purpose or result here: they rule in vain. The finite verb ἐποίησεν reflects the Hebrew qatal.
24 The plural subjunctives σπείρωσιν οὐδὲ μὴ φυτεύσωσιν translate plural qatals. The singular aorist passive subjunctive ῥιζωθῇ translates a singular qatal. The singular subject is ἡ ῥίζα. The form ἔπνευσεν is the first aorist of πνέω. The subject could be personal (God blew) or impersonal (it blew). The form ἐξηράνθησαν is the aorist passive of ξηραίνω. A καταιγίς is a gust of wind; it appears also in Isa 5:28; 17:13; 21:1; 29:6; 66:15 but in those cases it translates סוּפָה. Here, as in 41:16, it translates סְעָרָה. G also used it for שׁוֹט and הֶבֶל. Φρύγανον in the singular is a bush or dry stick; it is usually used in the plural, for dry brushwood. The connotation is that it is insubstantial (Hosea 10:7). Jeremiah 13:24 similarly uses the image of a twig blown by the wind.
25 Where Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the preferable indicative ὡμοιώσατε, Sinaiticus has the imperative form ὁμοιώσατε; it was not corrected by any later scribes. The Hebrew has a yiqtol form. For ὑψωθήσομαι Ziegler has ἰσωθήσομαι, on the basis of only 88, the Syrohexapla, and Jerome; Q’s margin lists ἰσωθήσομαι as the reading of Theodotion and Symmachus and εξἰσωθήσομαι as that of Aquila. The Hebrew form is weyiqtol. Although ὁ ἅγιος has the article, the Hebrew does not.
26 It is unusual for ἀναβλέπω to have an accusative τοὺςὀφθαλμούς; normally this would be dative, as in Gen 18:2; 22:13; 24:63; 24:64; 37:25; 43:29. GELS refers to Renehan’s Greek Lexicographical Notes. Eusebius considered it equivalent to the dative, ὀφθαλμοῖς ὁρᾶν (2.18). The original hand of Q wrote κατεδίωξεν (from καταδιώκω); this was then corrected to κατέδειξεν (the reading also of A, B, S corrector cb3, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The verb καταδείκνυμι has etymological links to revealing and showing, but in Isaiah (40:26; 41:20; 43:15; 45:18; also Gen 4:21)tends to be used for verbs of creating, in a way similar to the English “bring to light,” hence “unveil.”The phrase ἐπʼ ὀνόματι translates בשׁם.
The relation of the prepositional phrases ἀπὸ πολλῆς δόξης and ἐν κράτει ἰσχύος to the main clause is unclear. Brenton took them with the preceding sentence. Silva has “because of abundant glory and by might of strength, nothing has escaped you.” Although λανθάνω (of which ἔλαθεν is an aorist) would typically mean “escape” in such a synctactical context, Eusebius interpreted ἀπὸπολλῆς δόξηςκαὶἐνκράτειἰσχύοςοὐδένσεἔλαθεν to mean that because of all God’s power, no one ignores him (ἀπὸπολλῆς αὐτοῦ δόξηςκαὶ ἐξυπερβαλλούσης ἰσχύος μηδένα τῶν καλουμένων ἀπειθεῖν). In this reading, κράτειἰσχύοςhas an intensified meaning. Romans 1:20 speaks of the powers of nature, and Ephesians 1:19 and 6:10 use the same expression τῷ κράτει τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ (but genitive in Eph 1:19).
27 The form Ἀπεκρύβη is the aorist passive of ἀποκρύπτω, “hide.” The noun κρίσις, as in 40:14, refers to right judgement, i.e., justice. Israel should not complain that God is not acting justly. The form ἀφεῖλεν is an aorist of ἀφαιρέω, “take away.” The aorist ἀπέστη is from ἀφίστημι, and refers to putting distance between things.
28 The words εἰ μή followed by a secondary tense (such as the aorist here) generally are used for (1) the protasis of a contrary to fact conditional (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.2), or (2) an exception clause (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.11). In this case, εἰ μή is not in the protasis, so the hearing provides an exceptional case in which one might know. The ἄκρος indicates the farthest point, the extremes, so when applied to the land “corners” is a fitting translation. The future form πεινάσει is from πεινάω, “be hungry,” and κοπιάσει is the future of κοπιάω, which refers to being tired from exertion. The noun ἐξεύρεσις is a literal translation of חקר, “searching,” indicating one can never comprehend this. The form φρονήσεως is the genitive of φρόνησις, “thinking.” Romans 1:20 continues to echo (with no verbal parallels) the theme that human knowledge of God’s sovereignity can be based on observing the natural world. Hebrews 3:4 uses some forms identical to Isa 40:28: πᾶς γὰρ οἶκος κατασκευάζεται ὑπό τινος, ὁ δὲ πάντα κατασκευάσας θεός.
29 The participle διδοὺς is from δίδωμι; πίνουσιν is the present plural indicative of πίνω, and ὀδυνωμένοις is the dative plural passive participle of ὀδυνάω, “pain.”
30 The word νεώτεροι refers to young men. The verbs πεινάσουσιν and κοπιάσουσιν recall 40:28. The infinitive absolute כשׁול יכשׁלו is translated by a neologism, ἀνίσχυς, which would be understood to mean “without strength.”
Those who wait upon God will not grow weary(40:31-41:1)[[@Bible:Isa 39:5-8]]
31 The participle ὑπομένοντες is from ὑπομένω. The future of ἀλλάσσω (ἀλλάξουσιν) “change,” is a literal translation of יחליפו. The verb πτεροφυήσουσιν means to grow feathers, as the phoenix does in 1 Clem 25:3. The ἀετός is the eagle (despite being used of vultures in Matt 24:28; Luke 17:37), which is a symbol of swiftness. That symbolism is used in Rev 12:14 (καὶ ἐδόθησαν τῇ γυναικὶ αἱ δύο πτέρυγες τοῦ ἀετοῦ τοῦ μεγάλου, ἵνα πέτηται εἰς τὴν ἔρημον εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς, ὅπου τρέφεται ἐκεῖ καιρὸν καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἥμισυ καιροῦ ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ ὄφεως). The eagle is used as the Roman standard in Plutarch, Marius 23. The form δραμοῦνται is the future of τρέχω, to rush ahead. The pair κοπιάσουσιν and πεινάσουσιν recall 40:28-30. The form βαδιοῦνται is the future of βαδίζω, which means “go;” “walk” in contrast to τρέχω.
2 We have no comment from Eusebius on Isa 41:2-7. The preposition κατά with the accusative typically indicates correspondence or distribution; here with πόδας Brenton and Ottley translated “to his feet.” Ezekiel 40:24 has the directional sense in ἥγαγέ με κατὰ νότον. Sirach 14:25 has hands symbolizing proximity in Στήσει τὴν σκηνὴν αὐτοῦ κατὰ χεῖρας αὐτῆς. But the closest parallel is Judges 4:10: Καὶ ἐβόησε Βαρὰκ τὸν Ζαβουλὼν καὶ τὸν Νεφθαλὶ ἐκ Κάδης, καὶ ἀνέβησαν κατὰ πόδας αὐτοῦ δέκα χιλιάδες ἀνδρῶν, where in English we might say they followed at his heels. The sense of δίδωμι εἰς (see BDAG 17.b) is like that of Isa 42:24; 50:6; Ezek 33:27; Jer 32:17; 33:6; 37:16; Dan 7:11; Ps 56:4; 65:9; 120:3, where one consigns something to a dreaded fate.
3 G has nothing corresponding to the MT לאיבוא “he will not go” and 1QIsaaלואיבינו “he will not understand.”
4
Of the three nominatives Ἐγὼθεὸςπρῶτος, the subject is Ἐγὼ because the most definite of the three. The adjective describes the noun attributively. Revelation 1:4 alludes to God’s past and future persistence using the words χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦνκαὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος.
4 The phrase Ἐγώ εἰμι first appears here in Isaiah, and it will appear again 21 more times by the end of chapter 56. Almost always (except 45:19 and 47:10, because the Greek is doubled yet the Hebrew is not) it represents a Hebrew first person singular subject pronoun: 15 times the shorter אני, and 5 times the longer אנוכי. In six instances (41:4; 43:10; 43:25; 46:4; 48:12; 51:12), it is in conjunction with הוא; twice (45:18 and 48:17) the phrase represents אני יהוה. Ἐγώ εἰμι is almost always (except for 56:3 “I am a dry tree”) spoken by God. The phrase has a noun complement in 45:8; 45:19 “Lord”; 45:22; 46:9; 48:17 “God”; an adjective complement “first” in 48:12, a participle complement in 43:25 (“the one who wipes”); 51:12 (“the one who comforts”); 52:6 (“the one who speaks”); a prepositional phrase in 41:4 (“in the future”); 46:4 (“until old age” and “until you have grown old”); 48:12 (“forever”); and no complement (“I exist”) in 43:10; 45:18; 47:8, 10. Because the Greek simply represents the Hebrew, these are not instances of the translator injecting a theological point into his translation. Eusebius made no comment here (2.19) about the phrase ἐγώ εἰμι, even though Symmachus used the same expression, καὶ μετὰ τῶν ἐσχάτων ἐγώεἰμι.
5 G has ἔθνη in place of Hebrew איים. Ottley expressed doubt that G misread איים as גוים, but G confused waw with yod frequently, and it is not a stretch to suppose א might be read as ג.
6 Eusebius (2.19) explained the expression κρίνωνἕκαστοςτῷπλησίονκαὶτῷἀδελφῷβοηθῆσαι to mean that those who had been called decided (BDAG ④) to help their neighbors (οὐ γὰρ μόνον ἑαυτοὺς σῴζειν οἱ κεκλημένοι ἦλθον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς πλησίον κατὰ τοὺς τῆς φιλανθρωπίας νόμους).
7 Because τέκτων is a noun, not a participle like τύπτων andἐλαύνων, it is in parallel with χαλκεὺς; both are skilled tradesmen. The participles are both singular; because there is only one (singular) finite verb both nouns appear first, then both participles, the participles both describe the same person, who is doubly skilled.Barnes adduced σύμβλημα “joint” (of armour) in favour of his
argument that Isa 41:1-7 is a unity about a challenge to a trial by combat, in which Lord’s champion defeats those making preparations for war against him (Barnes 1903). Because ἰσχύρωσαν begins with an iota, the augment is not visible even though this is an aorist indicative.Athenagoras in Legatio pro Christianis 9 quoted 41:4 to say the Lord is our God; no other can be compared with him.
8 The middle voice of ἐξελεξάμην is typical in biblical literature. The active appears in the Greek Bible only in 1 Macc 9:25 and 3 Macc 6:29 (and Ezekiel 20:38in A and Q). The theme of God being fond of Abraham appears in James 2:23Ἐπίστευσεν δὲ Ἀβραὰμ τῷ θεῷ, καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην καὶ φίλος θεοῦ ἐκλήθη. The seed of Abraham is mentioned in Luke 1:54 (τῷ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα) and Heb 2:16 (οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται). The Song of Three Youths 11; Apocalypse of Abraham 9.7; Testament of Abraham 2.6; 1 Clem 10.1 and Ignatius Mag.10 call Abraham God’s φίλος “friend” based on 41:8, because he obeyed God’s commands (ἐν τῷ αὐτὸν ὑπήκοον γενέσθαι τοῖς ῥήμασιν τοῦ θεοῦ 1 Clem 10.1).
9 Matthew 12:18 alludes to the approved servant of God: ἰδοὺ ὁ παῖςμουὃν ᾑρέτισα, ὁ ἀγαπητός μου εἰς ὃν εὐδόκησεν ἡ ψυχή μου· θήσω τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελεῖ.
10 The negative particle μή before πλανῶ indicates that the verb is not indicative; it is rather a middle/passive imperative, contracted from πλανά+ε+σο. The phrase μὴ φοβοῦ appears also in Acts 18:9 in a vision encouraging Paul to keep speaking: Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος ἐν νυκτὶ διʼ ὁράματος τῷ Παύλῳ· μὴφοβοῦ, ἀλλὰ λάλει καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς.
11 Eusebius used this paragraph to encourage those who preach the gospel in the face of those who oppose the word of the gospel and try to hinder them: you will survive and witness their destruction (2.20).
12 The future tense of παροινήσουσινindicates thatthe raging is not taking place now, but is to be expected in the future from the opponents.
13 G has nothing corresponding to אני עזרתיך אל תיראי תולעת “I myself, I will help you. You must not fear, O worm of.”
14 God’s approval of the modest is also expressed in Luke 12:32 in conjunction with the command not to fear Μὴφοβοῦ, τὸ μικρὸν ποίμνιον, ὅτι εὐδόκησεν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν βασιλείαν. Luke 24:21 subsequently mentions the hope for one who is to redeem Israel: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ. In Isaiah this redeemer is God; on the road to Emmaus it is Jesus.
15 The phrase ὡςτροχοὺςἁμάξηςἀλοῶντας καινοὺςπριστηροειδεῖς has two accusative masculine plural adjectives, agreeing with the noun referring to wheels and participle for threshing, not to the pronoun object of ἐποίησα. The noun πριστηροειδῆς is classified as a neologism by LEH; the word for saw is πρίων. Eusebius (1.94) connected the threshing in Isa 28:24-29 with πριστηροειδέσι τροχοῖς. He made no extra explanation of this rare noun when he explained, “Just as they would chop up some straw by wheels of a wagon when threshing, so also when sawing up the demonic god-making of the Philistines and ungodly nations” (ὥσπερ τινὰ καλάμην διέτεμνον τροχῶν ἁμάξης τρόπον ἀλοῶντες καὶ καταπρίζοντες τῶν ἀλλοφύλων καὶ ἀθέων ἐθνῶν τὴν δαιμονικὴν θεοποιΐαν, 2.20). The adjectives conveying newness and the saw-shape indicate the effectiveness of the mincing. Ottley translated, “I make thee as wheels of a cart, that thresh out; new, with teeth like a saw.”
16 Instead of the singular “Holy One of Israel”(ובקדוש), G has the plural τοῖς ἁγίοις. Eusebius noted that Aquila and Symmachus had the singular instead of plural.
17 Rahlfs placed the words καὶ ἀγαλλιάσονται with what precedes, but Swete and Ziegler put them in verse 17. Eusebius agreed with Swete and Ziegler; he said a new paragraph begins with καὶ ἀγαλλιάσονται οἱ πτωχοί (2.20). Although often Κύριος ὁ θεός is followed by a genitive (17:6; 37:21; 52:12 of Israel; 30:18 our; 37:4; 43:4, 15 your; 38:5 of your father David; 42:13 might), and therefore might be understood as two nominatives in apposition (i.e., the “God of Israel” specifies who this “Lord” is), just as often Κύριος ὁ θεός is not followed by a genitive, and serves as the subject of a clause (8:10; 41:17, 21; 42:5, 6, 8, 21; 43:1, 10, 12, 14; 44:2; 45:1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11; 51:22; 57:21).
18 According to Eusebius, this paragraph addresses the conversion of the Gentiles (2.20); the water is the saving word.
20 The passive forms of ἐννοέω are indistinguishable in meaning from the active forms (compare Judith 9:5). The π rather than φ in the form ἐπιστῶνταιindicates that it is from ἐπίσταμαι (to understand), rather than ἐφίστημι (to position). The verb καταδιώκω means to pursue closely; καταδείκνυμι means to make known (see comment at 40:26).
21 The ability to predict the future is considered evidence of divinity. Eusebius disdained the pagan diviners and soothsayers who pretended to be able to predict the future; what little they were able to correctly predict was because of evil demons (2.21).
22 In the phrase τὰπρότερατίναἦνεἴπατε, the interrogative pronoun τίνα must be neuter nominative plural, matching τὰπρότερα. In 41:4 τὰ ἐπερχόμενα refers to the future as a period of time, rather than to specific things that would happen in the future. Eusebius attributed the ability to describe the past to prophetic power, as Moses was able to describe creation (2.21).
23 Origen argued on the basis of this passage that even angels could not comprehend the limits of the universe: its beginning and end (Princ. 4.1.26). As in 36:12, the first-hand of Q wrote the noun αἷμα; the iota was subsequently deleted to match the adverb ἅμα of S and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); A does not include καὶ ὀψόμεθα ἅμα. Swete’s apparatus lists Q’s first-hand reading, but Ziegler’s does not; in 36:12, neither Ziegler’s nor Swete’s apparatus listed Q’s first-hand reading.
24 Instead of מאין “from nothing,” G read מאן “from where” (πόθεν), and instead of מאפעhe read מארץ (ἐκ γῆς).
25 Revelation 7:2 alludes to the messenger from the rising of the sun in the words Καὶ εἶδον ἄλλον ἄγγελον ἀναβαίνοντα ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἔχοντα σφραγῖδα θεοῦ ζῶντος, καὶ ἔκραξεν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ τοῖς τέσσαρσιν ἀγγέλοις οἷς ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς ἀδικῆσαι τὴν γῆν καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν. Again Revelation 16:12 uses the same phrase when referring to rulers from the east: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου. Both instances in Revelation use the singular form rather than the plural that Isaiah uses.
25 The Sinaiticus reading καταπατηθήσεται was changed by corrector ca to καταπατηθήσεσθαι, which is orthographically compatible with the καταπατηθήσεσθε of Q, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
26 According to Eusebius, the phrase οὐδὲ ὁ ἀκούων ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους has two meanings: (a) those who heard the word were not able to understand it; and (b) people would stop listening to the polytheistic deceptions.
27 Eusebius claimed that “Zion” and “Jerusalem” refer to God’s church, on “the way” to God and his heavenly kingdom (2.21).
28 The phrase ἀπὸ γὰρ τῶν ἐθνῶν ἰδοὺ has no counterpart in Hebrew. Ottley suggested it was brought in from 63:3.
29 Although all the manuscripts and versions read εἰσίν (and so does Rahlfs), Ziegler has οὐθέν on conjecture. Instead of the reading πλανῶντες, which Q and all the earliest uncials have (and so does Rahlfs), Ziegler has πλάσσοντες, supported by the Lucianic families of manuscripts.
1 Eusebius insisted that the Jacob and Israel mentioned here refer to Christ, as the evangelist testifies (2.22). Matthew 12:18-21 quotes ἰδοὺ ὁ παῖς μου ὃν ᾑρέτισα, ὁ ἀγαπητός μου εἰς ὃν ηὐδόκησεν ἡ ψυχή μου: θήσω τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελεῖ. οὐκ ἐρίσει οὐδὲ κραυγάσει, οὐδὲ ἀκούσει τις ἐν ταῖς πλατείαις τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ. κάλαμον συντετριμμένον οὐ κατεάξει καὶ λίνον τυφόμενον οὐ σβέσει, ἕως ἂν ἐκβάλῃ εἰς νῖκος τὴν κρίσιν. καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. Eusebius noted that the Hebrew and the other translations do not mention Jacob or Israel here. Typically modern commentators have identified the Servant of the Lord with Israel in the first and second song, but as an individual in the third and fourth song (van der Kooij 1997b, 383). Because the Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16 and 19:25, Arie van der Kooij suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” here in Isa 42:1 also refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as also in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394). The approval of one’s son appears in Matt 3:17, καὶ ἰδοὺ φωνὴ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν λέγουσα· οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱόςμου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα and Luke 9:35, καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῆς νεφέλης λέγουσα· οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἐκλελεγμένος, αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε. Luke 3:22 alludes to the spirit being upon one’s approved son: καὶ καταβῆναι τὸπνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι· σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα. In Luke 23:35 it is the anointed of God who is expected to bear his approval: ἐξεμυκτήριζον δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες λέγοντες· ἄλλους ἔσωσεν, σωσάτω ἑαυτόν, εἰ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ χριστὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ ἐκλεκτός. Eusebius claimed that the “Spirit” here is the Word of God: Τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ δοθὲν ἐπὶ τὸν “ἐκ ῥίζης Ἰεσσαὶ” προελθόντα αὐτὸς ἦν ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, ὃ δὴ καὶ ὁ Ἀπόστολος ἐδήλου φάσκων· “ὁ δὲ κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστι” (2.22).
2 Gzella noted that ולוא ישא is a remarkably literal translation considering G felt free to add interpretive elements in the preceding verse. Instead of the causative יַשְׁמִ֥יעַ, G read a passive ישמע (Gzella 2005, 404).
3 The preposition εἰςtypically indicates not means but purpose (and here it translates ל), but Eusebius paraphrased the clause εἰς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν to
mean that he proclaims God’s judgement with truth and boldness: Σὺν ἀληθείᾳ δὲ καὶ παρρησίᾳ τοῖς πᾶσι διεστέλλετο τὰ περὶ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ κρίσεως.
Gzella suggested that ἀλλά represents G’s attempt to make the contrast more explicit (Gzella 2005, 405).
Lord God called you to bring freedom(42:6-9)[[@Bible:Isa 42:5-8]]
6 Simeon’s prayer in Luke 2:32 alludes to the light to the nations, in conjunction with God’s people Israel: φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
7Isa 42:7 is alluded to in Matt 11:5; Luke 1:79; Acts 26:18. The recovery of sight for blind people is mentioned in Matt 11:5 as part of a list of restorations: τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. In Luke 1:79, those seated and those in darkness are both mentioned, but in separate phrases: ἐπιφᾶναι τοῖς ἐνσκότει καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου καθημένοις. Acts 26:18 the opening of eyes is mentioned in connection with darkness: ἀνοῖξαιὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπὸ σκότους εἰς φῶς καὶ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σατανᾶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν.
8 The noun ἀρετή prototypically refers to something impressive or admirable. In contexts discussing morality, the English “virtue” serves the same purpose, but in contexts discussing events, it more commonly refers to military exploits when the agent is human, or miracles when the agent is divine (Josephus, Ant. 17, 130). In G, it always translates תְּהִלָּת, in Isa 42:8 as something of God’s that he does not give to others, in parallel with glory, but in Isa 42:12; 43:21; 63:7 as something of God’s that humans declare. The plural would then refer to his magnificent qualities (in this instance) or acts (in the other instances in Isaiah).
9 In light of the preceding association between divinity and the power to predict, Lord God is asserting his divinity.
10 The singing of a new song appears in Rev 14:3: καὶ ᾄδουσιν [ὡς] ᾠδὴν καινὴν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου καὶ ἐνώπιον τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων.
11 Ottley suggested that instead of ישׂאו, G read שׂישׂ (εὐφράνθητι). Once again Eusebius preferred the translation of Symmachus, which mentions cities rather than villages. Eusebius said the inhabitants of Petra were at his time engaged in demonic deception (2.23).
12 Eusebius took the mention of islands as indication that this prophecy does not refer to the Jews, so he interpreted the destruction described in the next paragraph as the rejection of Israel (2.23).
13 The prophecy depicts Lord God aggressively taking action; he is no longer patient. Orlinsky considered it impossible to tell if καὶ βοήσεται telescopes יודיע אף יצריח or the Greek corresponding to one or the other of these Hebrew words has dropped out (Orlinsky 1952).
15 Lord promises to turn things around. G has nothing corresponding to אחריב הרים וגבעות וכול עשבם אוביש.
16 The allusion in Acts 26:18 to Isaiah 42:7 is continued with mention of darkness into light: ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπὸ σκότουςεἰςφῶς καὶ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σατανᾶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν.
17 G uses a variety of words to speak of idols. The first of them used here, γλυπτός, prototypically refers to something carved, and in the scriptures is almost always (in Isaiah the exception is in 46:1) a translation of the root פסל, which likewise refers to something carved. Other words for idols include χειροποίητος and εἴδωλον, which both typically are translations of אליל. In 30:22, פסל is translated as εἴδωλον. The second, χωνευτός refers to something cast of molten metal, and is almost always a translation of the root נסך, as here and 48:5.
18 Isa 42:18-19 is referenced in Matt 11:5 and Luke 7:22. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke 7:22 has the same without some conjunctions: ὅτι τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται.
19 Only S omits ἢ after ἀλλʼ, but the meaning is the same as ἀλλʼ by itself (Smyth 1956, sec. 2777).
21 Rahlfs placed the words καὶ εἶδον at the end of verse 21; Swete and Ziegler at the beginning of verse 22. There is punctuation before these words in Q: a middle dot. According to sense, the words belong with what follows (with Swete, Ziegler).
22 Although the hiding might be reflexive if αυτους was aspirated as αὑτούς, Eusebius interpreted what was being hidden as the schemes: “For in the very schemes that they were hiding” (ἐν γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῖς λογισμοῖς, οὓς ἔκρυπτον, 2.23).
23 After εἰσακούσεται (Codex Vaticanus has εἰσακούσατε, a spelling variant of εἰσακούσεται), the first-hand of Sinaiticus added τῆς φωνὴς τοῦ παιδὸς αὐτοῦ; that reading was changed by cb2 to εἰσακούσεται, but the original wording was reinstated by cb3.
24 God takes credit for the defeat of Israel, for their disobedience.
25 The verb συμφλέγω is simply the emphatic συν prefixed to the common verb φλέγω used to refer inflaming or burning something. It appears only here in the scriptures, but it does appear in Plutarch, Alexander 60.2, where the soldiers are burned to death by the thunderbolts. The emphatic English “burn altogether” carries some of the etymological meaning of συν.
1 Lord God reassures Israel of his redemption and dedication. Eusebius interpreted these as those of superior rank who had received the saving word (2.24).
2 The fact that μετὰ σοῦ εἰμι is translated with the present tense even though the rest of the sentence is future and the following parallel is also future shows G’s preference to render the Hebrew verbless clause with the Greek present tense, as also in 43:3. The verb συγκλύζω is an emphatic form of κλύζω meaning to wash away in the sense of overwhelm rather than to remove filth.
3 For the spelling of σῴζων I follow Rahlfs and Ziegler rather than Swete’s spelling σώζων. The noun ἄλλαγμα appears only here in Isaiah; it prototypically refers to something given in exchange for something else, so is commonly used for “price” or “wages.” This noun and λυτρόω are used together in Leviticus 27:33, “You will not exchange a fair animal for a bad one, but if you do exchange it, then its ἄλλαγμα will be holy; it will be not redeemed.’ ” (LES).
4 The phrase “I have loved you” from Isa 43:4 is used in Rev 3:9, but the order of the words is changed, as is typical for Revelation’s use of Isaiah: ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼἠγάπησάσε.
5 Matthew 8:11 and Luke 13:29 allude to the gathering of God’s people from the east and the west. Matthew has πολλοὶ ἀπὸἀνατολῶνκαὶδυσμῶν ἥξουσιν καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται μετὰ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν; Luke has καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸἀνατολῶνκαὶδυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. In Acts 18:9 Paul is told not to fear, with the same phrase as in Isa 43:5: Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος ἐν νυκτὶ διʼ ὁράματος τῷ Παύλῳ· μὴφοβοῦ, ἀλλὰ λάλει καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς.
6 God’s sons and daughters are also mentioned in 2 Cor 6:18: καὶ ἔσομαι ὑμῖν εἰς πατέρα καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθέ μοι εἰς υἱοὺςκαὶθυγατέρας, λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ.
7 The perfect ἐπικέκληνται is passive; the active would mean “call upon.” According to Eusebius, “Christian” is the name by which God’s people are called (2.24).
8 A concessive participle normally precedes the main verb (see Porter 1992, sec. 10.5.1), but there is no main verb in the verbless clause καὶκωφὰτὰὦταἔχοντες.
9 The neuter plural ἀληθῆ could be the accusative object of the verb “say true things” or the nominative word spoken: “say, ‘True!’”
10 In place of two words καὶ ἐγώ (the reading of S and B), Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have κἀγώ, as also in 44:4. The phrase ἐγώ εἰμι has meanings that differ depending on where the meaning is located: in the translator’s intention, in the understanding of a typical (non-Christian) Greek reader, and in the interpretation of early Christians. The translator was trying to be faithful to the Hebrew אני הוא “I am he,” i.e., “I am the one.” In context, the meaning is that there is no other God; He is it; He is the only one. What a native Greek speaker would have understood is a different question. Eusebius gave an indication of how an early Christian interpreter understood this expression when he wrote that the reason Christ came was to preach the knowledge of God to everyone, and understanding concerning him to those who were ignorant about him: τὸ γὰρ αἴτιον τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίας καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων αὐτοῦ εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη μαρτυρίας οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν ἢ τὸ κηρύξαι τὴν τοῦ ἐπὶ πάντων θεοῦ γνῶσιν καὶ τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν πίστιν καὶ τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ σύνεσιν τοῖς πρὶν ἀσυνέτοις καὶ ἀσυνθέτοις καὶ ἀπίστοις καὶ ἐν ἀγνωσίᾳ οὖσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τυφλώττειν τοὺς τῆς διανοίας ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ περὶ τὴν πλάνην τῆς ἀθέου εἰδωλολατρίας εἱλεῖσθαι (2.24). In other words, he thought συνῆτε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι meant “that you might understand what God is.” The phrase ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι appears twice in John’s gospel, at and, as the object of knowing in John 8:28 (ὅταν ὑψώσητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τότε γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ ἀπʼ ἐμαυτοῦ ποιῶ οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ καθὼς ἐδίδαξέν με ὁ πατὴρ ταῦτα λαλῶ) and the object of believing in John 13:19 (ἀπʼ ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵναπιστεύσητε ὅταν γένηται ὅτιἐγώεἰμι).
11 I accent πάρεξ the same way as Rahlfs and Ziegler rather than as Swete’s epic form παρὲξ (Herodianus 2.63, 931).
12 As in 44:4, 10, καὶ ἐγώ is written as one word (κἀγώ), as also in A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); S and B use two words instead.
13 The image of existence since ancient times is picked up in John 8:58’s πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί and with the same wording in 1 John 1:1’s Ὃ ἦν ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς.
14 Luke 24:21 alludes to the one who was going to redeem Israel, in the wordsἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ.
15 The verb καταδείκνυμι means to make something evident (see the comment at 40:26).
16 The image of walking on the sea is picked up in Matt 14:25: τετάρτῃ δὲ φυλακῇ τῆς νυκτὸς ἦλθεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν.
17 In place of ἀλλά, the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs, Ziegler conjectured ἅμα, on the basis of the MT; this is attested by no manuscript or version. Q spelled θεός rather than using the nomen sacrum θς.
18 Revelation 21:4 alludes to the “former things:” καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, [ὅτι] τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν. Paul alluded to the new things being made, in contrast to the old things in 2 Cor 5:17: ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις· τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονεν καινά.
19 The allusion in Revelation continues into the next verse: Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ καθήμενος ἐπὶ τῷ θρόνῳ· ἰδοὺκαινὰποιῶ πάντα. The emergence of rivers is mentioned
in John 7:38: ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ, καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφή, ποταμοὶ ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος.
20 Although when ποτίζω has two accusatives (as in Mark 9:41) it means to give the object that is a liquid to the object who is a person. In ποτίσαι τὸ γένος μου τὸ ἐκλεκτόν one of the accusatives is an adjective in attributive position, so the personal object γένοςis being given an unspecified drink. The chosen family is mentioned in 1 Pet 2:9: ὑμεῖς δὲ γένοςἐκλεκτόν, βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, ἔθνος ἅγιον.
21 First Peter 2:9 continues the allusion to Isaiah with λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, ὅπως τὰς ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλέσαντος εἰς τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς. See the comment at 42:8 on the plural of ἀρετή referring to impressive or admirable things. As examples of these magnificent acts, Eusebius listed the wonders (θαύματα) that he exhibited in Egypt, the Red Sea, and the wilderness (2.26).
22 In translating ἐκάλεσα, G read the first person קראתי instead of the second person קראת. Instead of אתי, G read עתה (νῦν).
23 The correction made by Sinaiticus corrector ca adds ἐδούλευσας ἐν ταῖς θυσίαις σου; these words are absent from Q and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). This reading is present in A, and was left in S by corrector cb2 (who tends to agree with A).
24 The verb προΐστημι refers to standing in someone’s presence attending them, not in a hostile way but often to lead, as in 1 Macc 5:19, or protect, as in 4 Macc 11:27.
25 The verb ἐξαλείφω refers to making something disappear by wiping it. One might think the nature of this wiping is significant: it could be to paint over the sin (in which case the sin is still there but no longer evident), or to wash the sin away (in which case the sin is not evident because it has been removed). Herodotus (7.69) used the verb in the first sense, to describe the Ethiopians’ body paint, and Thucydides (3.20) used it to describe whitewashing. This is the meaning in Lev 14:42 and 1 Chr 29:4, where it is applied to buildings. But even in the cases where something non-physical is wiped, the result is that it no longer
exists, or at least it no longer comes to mind or has any import, as it is used regarding one’s name in Numbers 5:23, or one’s remembrance in Exodus 17:14. The reading of Q, A, and S, τὰς ἀνομίας σου, is followed by Rahlfs; B’s reading τὰς ἀνομίας σου ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου is followed by Ziegler. The omission is a case of parablepsis due to homoioteleuton. The removal of sins is alluded to in Mark 2:7 (τίς δύναται ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός;) and Luke 5:21 (τίς δύναται ἁμαρτίας ἀφεῖναι εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ θεός;), where it is an ability accorded only to God.
26 As Eusebius, the oracle aims at repentance: the thing to be remembered is “what you once were,” and such remembrance of one’s sins constitutes confession.
27 Eusebius took the “rulers” as the nation’s leaders, and the “fathers” as the elderly. He preferred the translation of Symmachus, which has ἑρμηνεῖς “interpreters” rather than ἄρχοντες “rulers.”
28 Kim addressed the question of the “rulers,” arguing plausibly but inconclusively that the “rulers” of the Jews in the Second Temple period would have been priests because although Yehud had Persian civil governors from outside, the native authority was the high priest (2009, 200–209).
1 The noun παῖς is translated here as “servant” rather than “child” or “boy” for consistency with instances where it is in parallel with “chosen messenger.” Ekblad has pointed out that in contrast to the Hebrew Isaiah 41:1 where Lord threatens judgment on the nations, in Greek Isaiah 41:1 the nations judge the gods and ask Lord for counsel. In his words, “The LXX presents God as distinct from servant Israel and the unidentified servant. At the same time God is clearly identified with both servant Israel and the differentiated servant figure. This differentiation and identification are woven together in such a way the servant’s mission, persecution and final victory are at the same time those of God” (Ekblad 1999, 282–83).
2 Revelation 1:17 uses the expression μὴ φοβοῦ in conjunction with ἐγώ εἰμι, which appears in Isa 43:25: καὶ ἔθηκεν τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπʼ ἐμὲ λέγων· μὴφοβοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος. Ephesians 1:6 refers to the beloved: εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ ἧς ἐχαρίτωσεν ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ.
3 According to Eusebius, the “Jacob” and “Israel” in chapter 44 are not the same as those at the end of 43. Because these names are now qualified by the expressions “my servant” and “whom I have chosen,” they must be referring to the apostles. The promise of “water” is therefore to these Christians, and the “water” is intellectual and spiritual (2.25).
4 The neuter participle παραρρέον (spelled παραρέον in Q, A, and S corrector ca) matches the neuter ὕδωρ. The verb παραρρέω is rare (in the scriptures only at Proverbs 3:21; Hebrews 2:1) but because it is a compound of ῥέω, the meaning of flowing past is clear enough. The preposition ἐπί indicates position relative to an object, but not necessarily that the position is over, on or above the object, as Revelation 3:20, where Jesus stands ἐπί the door and knocks. Eusebius said the willow is a parable of the intellectual waters flowing in the church (2.26): καὶ ἐνταῦθα δὲ τὴν ἰτέαν παρέλαβε διὰ τὸ ἀειθαλὲς καὶ νεαρὸν τοῦ φυτοῦ εἰς παράστασιν τοῦ πλήθους τῶν λογικῶν ὑδάτων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ αὐτοῦ ῥευσόντων.
5 The shift from third person ἐρεῖ to first person εἰμι indicates a shift to direct speech, hence the capitalized Τοῦ. The fronted Τοῦθεοῦ puts the emphasis on the person to whom the speaker belongs. The future middle βοήσεται appears once in the first-hand of Q, A, S corrector cb2, papyrus 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) and twice in the first-hand of S, B, and in Q’s margin. The verbβοάω can take its future in the middle voice, and with an accusative object it can mean “call on” (LSJ II.1), but these are unusual uses. The reason βοάω is used is to represent the Hebrew יקרא (which without vowel pointing is ambiguous for active qal or passive Nifal). Eusebius settled the interpretation by taking it to mean that the person was claiming to be Israelκαὶ πάλιν ἕτερος ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ βοήσεται, σεμνύνει ἑαυτὸν λέγων εἶναι Ἰσραήλ (2.25) In place of our manuscript’s ἐπιγράψει (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has ἐπιγράψῃ; A has ἐπιγράφει; B has ἐπιγράψει χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. Vaticanus has “the hand” (the tendency to correct towards the MT is why B is called “hexaplaric”), but even so, it is in the dative: ἐπιγράψει χειρὶ αὐτοῦ “with his hand.” Mirjam van der Vorm-Croughs noted this along with six other examples under section 5.6.2 “The omission of a nominal object.” Section 5.6, on “Implicitation by the omission of an object” begins, “Just as was the case with other sentence elements, objects were probably also mostly omitted because their information was seen as redundant (see e.g. 9:3[4]; 25:10; 26:20, 21; 28:4; 30:14, 33; 31:7; 33:12; 36:21; 40:20; 44:5; and 54:1 below). Furthermore they may have been deleted in order to circumvent a certain suggestion in the text (e.g. 37:28–29 and 59:13), or to give a broader validity to the words (e.g. 8:11 and
40:17). Lastly, they may sometimes have been omitted for the sake of parallelism (e.g. 44:7; 46:11; and 48:15).” She mentions it again in her section on Epiphora as a rhetorical figure: “A second omission from the Hebrew concerns the noun phrase ידו. By means of its deletion the third clause has become more parallel to the second one.” The idea of marking oneself for inclusion is picked up in Rev 13:6: καὶ ποιεῖ πάντας, τοὺς μικροὺς καὶ τοὺς μεγάλους, καὶ τοὺς πλουσίους καὶ τοὺς πτωχούς, καὶ τοὺς ἐλευθέρους καὶ τοὺς δούλους, ἵνα δῶσιν αὐτοῖς χάραγμα ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν τῆς δεξιᾶς ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ μέτωπον αὐτῶν.
6 The word πλήν here is functioning as a preposition (indicating an exception) rather than as an adversative conjunction. The claim to be first and last is picked up in Revelation 1:17’s μὴ φοβοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ πρῶτοςκαὶ ὁ ἔσχατος.
7 Where Q, A, and papyrus 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read στήτω καλεσάτω, the original hand of Sinaiticus read στήτω καὶ λαλησάτω; the difference is between ΚΑΙΛΑΛΗ and ΚΑΛΗ. The first-hand reading of S was changed by ca to στήτω καὶ καλεσάτω καὶ λαλησάτω. Vaticanus has στήτω καὶ καλεσάτω καὶ ἀναγγειλάτω.
9 The verb γλύφω is used mainly for engraving but also for sculpting. The verb πλάσσω is typically used for God forming humans at creation. The criticism of idolatry in 44:9-20 is echoed in Acts 17:29: οὐκ ὀφείλομεν νομίζειν χρυσῷ ἢ ἀργύρῳ ἢ λίθῳ, χαράγματι τέχνης καὶ ἐνθυμήσεως ἀνθρώπου, τὸ θεῖον εἶναι ὅμοιον.
10 The original reading of Sinaiticus with πάντες before οἱ πλάσσοντες (in agreement with Marchalianus and Alexandrinus, and adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler) was deleted by corrector cb2 (Vaticanus also does not have the word here), but the deleted word was reinstated by cb3. This is a rare instance of cb2 disagreeing with Q and Rahlfs and Ziegler; usually cb2 agrees with Rahlfs and Ziegler, and when cb3 reverts the reading it is in the direction away from Rahlfs and Ziegler. B places πάντες later, before ἀνωφελῆ. Q*, A, and Rahlfs and Ziegler agree with S here; Q’s margin allows for the second πάντες.
11 The relative clause ὅθενἐγένοντο most naturally qualifies what immediately precedes (“all those from whom they came”). The subject of ἐγένοντο would then be the gods that were made. The dificulty with this reading is that the plural verb ἐγένοντο does not match the singular θεόν. No better solution is evident (Eusebius did not comment on this sentence), so the English translation preserves the ambiguity of the Greek. The nominative phrase κωφοὶ ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων is preceded by καί, which connects this nominative plural with the other, πάντες ὅθεν ἐγένοντο, both functioning as the subject of ἐξηράνθησαν.
11 The verb ἐντρέπω is typically used in the passive to express feeling misgiving, and αἰσχύνω to express feeling or experiencing shame.
12 The original hand of Q wrote ἠργάσατο; this was then corrected to εἰργάσατο in agreement with S, A, B, and Rahlfs and Ziegler. The reading καὶ εἰργάσατο for the second instance agrees with B; S and A have εἰργάσατο, which is adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
13 Porter said it is not the aspect (aorist) but the placement of the participle ἐκλεξάμενος before the main verb ἔστησεν that indicates that the choosing precedes the setting (1992, sec. 10.4.1).
14 The reading Κύριος without the article (the reading also of S and A) is followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has ὁ κύριος, so Swete uses the lowercase noun.
15 Just as in verse 13, the participle λαβὼν indicates the taking precedes the warming, and the burning precedes the baking.
16 The textual evidence for the first part of the verse is complex. The differences among the great codices and editions are presented in parallel here:
17 Q*, S, A, B* all read εξελουμαι, but this must be the imperative with an object Ἐξελοῦ με (as with Q’s corrector, B corrector ab, Rahlfs and Ziegler) rather than one verb εξελουμαι.
18 The verb ἀπαμαυρόω/ἀπαμαυρόομαι is derived from ἀμαυρός, which means dim, faint, faded. According to GELS, the verb means to deprive of the ability to see. The simple verb ἀμαυρόω means to make dim but also in Deut 34:7 it is used to claim that Moses’ eyesight had not failed.
19 The reading of Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is τῇ καρδίᾳ; Sinaiticus scribe B initially wrote ἡ καρδία, but corrected himself with τῇ καρδίᾳ. The phrase is absent in Vaticanus. The translator uses a variety of verbs of knowing: ἔγνωσαν (γινώσκω), φρονῆσαι (φρονέω), τοῦνοῆσαι (νοέω), ἐλογίσατο (λογίζομαι), ἀνελογίσατο(ἀναλογίζομαι), but the variation is not arbitrary; it matches the Hebrew. Similarly, the three terms referring to the person’s cognitive ability τῇκαρδίᾳ, τῇψυχῇ, and τῇφρονήσειreflect some variation in Hebrew, but the Hebrew has only the first and last of these three. There is no Hebrew word here corresponding toτῇψυχῇ.
20 Instead of רעה “shepherd,” G read דעה, yielding γνῶθι.
21 God’s declaration of sonship is picked up in Jesus’ baptism at Luke 3:22, with the reordered σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα, in which παῖς is changed to υἱός.
22 The future λυτρώσομαι indicates that G read וגאלתיך instead of כיגאלתיך.
23 The accusative εὐφροσύνην is not a direct object of βοήσατε but modifies the verb in a more broadly adverbial way (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.3), indicating the joyful manner in which nature is to call out. Rev 12:12 alludes to this command to the heavens and other parts of creation to rejoice: διὰ τοῦτο εὐφραίνεσθε, οὐρανοὶ καὶ οἱ ἐν αὐτοῖς σκηνοῦντες.
24 The redeemer is alluded to in Luke 24:21 in the disappointment of the expectation that Jesus would be the one to redeem Israel: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ·
25 Because punctuation precedes but does not follow the words τίς ἕτερος, they belong with what follows (as Swete and Ziegler have it) rather than with what precedes (as Rahlfs has it). The notion of God making human wisdom foolishness is picked up by Paul in 1 Cor 1:20: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; ποῦ συζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
26 According to Eusebius, the “servant” and “messengers” are the apostles and disciples and evangelists (2.27), and the rebuilding refers to the restoration after the destruction by the Babylonians.
27 Revelation 16:12 alludes to the drying of the rivers: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου.
28 Acts 13:22 applies identical words (with one transposition) to David: εὗρον Δαυὶδ τὸν τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, ἄνδρα κατὰ τὴν καρδίαν μου, ὃς ποιήσειπάντατὰθελήματάμου.
1 According to Eusebius, Cyrus was called ”anointed,” because God promoted him to the kingdom, following the Hebrew meaning of “anointed,” which referred to those that were led forward by God and anointed as kings (2.27).
2 Hoffmann noted that the Masoretic Text וַהֲדוּרִיםאוֹשִׁר has the more difficult reading. G (καὶ ὄρη ὁμαλιῶ), 1QIsa (והררים יאושר), and the Syriac point to a common older Vorlage that provides the original text, upon which MT seeks to improve. The original text that can explain both the MT and G (along with 1QIsa and Syr) is והדרים אישׁר “and the ramparts I’ll grind” (Hoffmann 1972).
3 Ottley placed ἀοράτους in angle brackets; it is absent in the first-hand of A. Although the literal translation of θησαυροὺς σκοτεινούς is “dark treasures,” the darkness does not connote evil but rather safe-keeping; they do not see the light of day. The pair of adjectives ἀποκρύφους ἀοράτους appear without a corresponding noun to modify. The translation “hidden unseen things” is not meant to imply ἀοράτους is functioning substantivally and ἀποκρύφους attributively, but rather both adjectives modifying something elided, so that “hidden and unseen things” may convey the meaning better. Colossians 2:3 alludes to the hidden treasure of knowledge: ἐν ᾧ εἰσιν πάντες οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι.
Lord God makes all things(45:4-7)[[@Bible:Isa 45:1-6]]
4 The conjunction δέ that connects σὺ δὲ οὐκ ἔγνως to the preceding ἐγὼ καλέσω σε τῷ ὀνόματί μου καὶ προσδέξομαί σε would not itself carry an concessive sense (“although”); its semantic function is at most adversative (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.7).
5 According to Eusebius, Cyrus turned to other (ancestral) gods, even though it was the one God who had anointed him and received him into his family (2.27).
6 Although a ἵνα clause typically indicates purpose, it can also express result or consequence (Porter 1992, sec. 14.2.2).
7 The Hebrew behind κτίζω is typically ברא, but in Isaiah, ברא is translated more often with ποιέω (6 times compared to 4 for κτίζω, 3 for καταδείκνυμι, and 2 for κατασκευάζω). The Hebrew ברא only appears once in Isaiah before chapter 40. The first time G translates ברא as κτίζω is in this verse, though he has encountered the Hebrew word nine times by now. Following his usual tendency, he first uses ποιέω for ברא, then encounters עשׂה, which is a better match for ποιέω, so he uses ποιέω again. So when ברא appears immediately next, he opts not to use ποιέω for a third consecutive time, and opts for κτίζω instead. When ποιέω appears one more time, it reflects עשׂה again. The meaning of κατασκευάζω tends toward building and constructing rather than creating from nothing. So it is striking that God brings bad things (κακά) into existence; yet G’s choice of vocabulary simply reflects the Hebrew. The neuter plural κακά indicates not that God created evil but that God brings bad things (punishments) upon people.
8 Eusebius certainly understood κτίσας to mean not just forming or establishing, but creation from nothing, since he referred to 2 Macc 7:28’s phrase “out of that which did not exist.”
Lord God formed you(45:8-9)[[@Bible:Isa 45:8-10]]
8 Eusebius certainly understood κτίσας to mean not just forming or establishing, but creation from nothing, since he referred to 2 Macc 7:28’s phrase “out of that which did not exist.”
Ask Lord God about what he produced(45:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 45:8-10]]
9 Because ποιέω is a transitive verb, the accusative neuter interrogative pronoun τί is the object “What,” rather than “Why.” Because it is neuter rather than masculine, it cannot be the personal “Who.” In Romans 9:20 Paul alluded to the ridiculous situation of the clay questioning the potter (ὦ ἄνθρωπε, μενοῦνγε σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ ἀνταποκρινόμενος τῷ θεῷ; μὴἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι· τί με ἐποίησας οὕτως), but the quotation is from not here but Isaiah 29:16, which reads οὐχ ὡς ὁ πηλὸς τοῦ κεραμέως λογισθήσεσθε; μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι Οὐ σύ με ἔπλασας; ἢ τὸ ποίημα τῷ ποιήσαντι Οὐ συνετῶς με ἐποίησας; In Romans, because ποιέω has an object (με) the interrogative means “Why.”
10
The verb γεννάω is transitive, and ὠδινάω can be transitive (meaning to be in labour with something, as in Song of Songs 9:5; Psalm 7:15; Isa 66:8), so “What” rather than “Why” is appropriate in those cases as well. Prior to ὁ λέγων (the reading of Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the reading μὴ ἀποκριθήσεται τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πρὸς πλάσαντι αὐτὸν is present in the original hand of S; the phrase appears in Codex Vaticanus without the datives, as μὴ ἀποκριθήσεται τὸ πλάσμα πρὸς τὸν πλάσαντα αὐτό. (Ziegler’s apparatus gives the reading of S* as μη αποκριθησεται το πλασμα τω προσπλασαντι προς τον πλασαντα αυτον.) S corrector cb2 removed it so that the text matched the reading of A (and Q). Subsequently corrector cb3 restored the words back to the reading of B. Rahlfs and Ziegler prefer the reading of Q and A. The words τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι could be taken from Isaiah 29:16 (or from Romans), but even so ἀποκριθήσεται is original here and is not a harmonization to Romans.
11 According to Eusebius, God is speaking rhetorically here, showing that no one is in a position to question God or command him about his sons, daughters, or creations. Since no one can advise God, instead they should listen to his prophets (2.28).
12 In all the instances of ἐγώ in this verse and the next except for one, ἐγώ is a translation of a Hebrew first person singular subject pronoun. Its presence in Greek is therefore not because the translator wished to add any emphasis.
13 The verb ἤγειρα could be from ἐγείρω “I raised” or ἀγείρω, “I gathered,” but the more common ἐγείρω makes better sense in this context. Eusebius compared this raising to that of the Christ of God (2.28), who also loosed the pangs of death (Acts 2:24) and was established king (Psalm 2:6).
Eusebius interpreted the phrase ἐν σοὶ to refer not to God’s presence among the people (the pronoun is singular after all), but rather to the indwelling of God in Christ: ὁ θεὸς ἐν αὐτῷ ἦν καὶ διὰ τὸν ἐνοικοῦντα ἐν αὐτῷ θεὸν καὶ αὐτὸς θεὸς ἦν (2.28). Paul, however, changed the pronoun to the plural in 1 Cor 14:25: τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ φανερὰ γίνεται, καὶ οὕτως πεσὼν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον προσκυνήσει τῷ θεῷ ἀπαγγέλλων ὅτι ὄντως ὁ θεὸς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστιν.
15 Eusebius took this opportunity to remind his readers that the name Jesus means saviour (2.28).
16 Luke 13:17 quotes the phrase referring to all those who oppose him, saying that they were shamed: κατῃσχύνοντο πάντες οἱ ἀντικείμενοι αὐτῷ, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος ἔχαιρεν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐνδόξοις τοῖς γινομένοις ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ.
17 The accusative σωτηρίαναἰώνιον could be labelled an accusative of respect, like Luke 7:29 βαπτισθέντες τὸ βάπτισμα “being baptized with the baptism” or 1 Thess 2:4 πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον “to be entrusted with the gospel” (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.3). This eternal salvation is mentioned in Heb 5:9: καὶ τελειωθεὶς ἐγένετο πᾶσιν τοῖς ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ αἴτιος σωτηρίας αἰωνίου. Of the two negative predictionsοὐκαἰσχυνθήσονταιοὐδὲ μὴἐντραπῶσιν, the second (subjunctive; the second aorist passive of ἐντρέπω omits the θ morpheme) is more emphatic than the first (future indicative). The verb ἐντρέπω is very frequent in Isaiah; only 2 Chronicles and EsdrasA use it more frequently. In Isaiah it appears in chapters 16, 41, 44, 45, 50, and 54.The verb αἰσχύνω is used more frequently than in Isaiah only in the Psalms.
18 If Isaiah is divided into sections according to instances of the expression οὕτωςλέγει, the present section so delimited extends from 45:18 to 48:17. As noted at 40:26, καταδείξαςis an act of creation etymologically related to revealing, hence the English “unveil.”Although the phrase ἐγώ εἰμι occurs relatively frequently here and in the next verse (as
noted at 41:4), G does not add theological significance to the phrase, but merely reflects it in his translation. Likewise, Eusebius did not see fit to comment on this phrase.
19 John 18:20 alludes to the public nature of the divine speech, when Jesus says, ἐγὼ παρρησίᾳ λελάληκα τῷ κόσμῳ, ἐγὼ πάντοτε ἐδίδαξα ἐν συναγωγῇ καὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, ὅπου πάντες οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι συνέρχονται, καὶ ἐνκρυπτῷ ἐλάλησα οὐδέν.
20 As noted in BDAG, the passive form (συνάχθητε) of συνάγω can be used “with active force,” meaning “assemble,” as in Matt 22:41. The two accusatives τὸξύλον and γλύμμααὐτῶν could be interpreted in apposition “the tree, their engraving” or as a double accusative, so that they life up “the tree as their engraving.” The singular form Eusebius used, γλύμμα, favours interpreting the relation as apposition.
21 Mark 12:32 alludes to this expression of the uniqueness of God: εἷς ἐστιν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ. Acts 15:18 also refers to what has long been known, using the phrase γνωστὰ ἀπʼ αἰῶνος.
22 Up to this point, G has been referring to the ends of the earth using τὰἄκρατῆςγῆς(קצה in 5:26; 40:28; 41:5, 9; 42:10; 43:6; אפס in 52:10), but here the Hebrew is not קצהbut אפס. Therefore G correspondingly switches to ἐσχάτουτῆςγῆς, which he has previously used for מרחק in 8:9, and he will inexplicably now begin to use also forקצה, in 48:20; 49:6; 62:11. Therefore when he next encounters an expression referring to the ends of the earth using אפס in 52:10, to reflect the change in Hebrew, he changes his Greek choice back to τὰἄκρα.
Every knee will bend to Lord(45:22-25)[[@Bible:Isa 45:18-19]]
22
23 After examining intertextual relationships between Isaiah and Proverbs, Cook considered it unclear whether one of these books is dependent on the other, and suggested the scales tip slightly in favour of Isaiah using Proverbs (Cook 2010). However, because the expression shared by Isa 45:23 and Prov 3:16 is not in the Hebrew of Proverbs but is an addition to the Greek, the scales actually tip in the opposite direction (as Tov and Fox suggest). Rom 14:11 paraphrases and cites Isa 45:23 as ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ. Phillipians 2:10-11 applies it to Jesus: ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶνγόνυκάμψῃ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων καὶπᾶσαγλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός.
25 According to Eusebius, the phrasing “seed of the sons of Israel” is significant because “sons of Israel” are the first evangelists, and their offspring are the ones who will be justified and glorified (2.29).
1 The message that there is only one God, and others are imaginary continues with two named objects of worship: Bel and Dagon. The Hebrew corresponding to Dagon is נבו (Nabo, as B has it), falsifying Wutz’s (1933) hypothesis that G is a transcription of the Hebrew; Q’s margins further record the readings of Symmachus (Νεβούς) and Theodotion & Aquila (Ναβώ, as in B).
2 The participle πεινῶντιis spelled πινωντιin the first-hands of both Q and S, but the contracted vowel ωrather than ουindicates that this is not the verb πίνω, “drink,” but is rather πεινάω, “hunger” which also fits the context better.Among the three affirmative dative masculine singular participles describing the burden-carrier, there is one negated participle: οὐκἰσχύοντι. So although it is possible to translate “not to the strong one,” it is simpler to interpret the referent of this negated participle to be the same carrier of the burden (i.e., he has no strength) rather than introduce a new referent (one who has strength), and indicate that the burden is on the weak person and not on the strong one. Although οἱis masculine and does not match the neuter αὐτά, there is no better candidate for a referent. The
referent cannot be the addressees because the verbδυνήσονταιis third person rather than second person. Reading οἱ as the definite article rather than as the relative pronoun οἵ does not solve the problem; it makes the clause even more awkward. The adjective αἰχμάλωτοι is nominative because it describes the subject of the verb ἤχθησαν.
4 The future of ἀναλαμβάνω takes middle forms, so there is no special reflexive sense to ἀναλήμψομαι. Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, here in 46:4; Q’s corrector deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; and from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5.
5 Q, A, and B have the question τίνι με ὡμοιώσατε; S has ὁμοιώσατε. The lack of augment in ὁμοιώσατε indicates the imperative, which makes τινί με ὁμοιώσατε not a question. The middle of τεχνάζω means to contrive cunningly.
6 The verb συμβάλλω has a prototypical meaning of encountering. But with gold as an object and “from a purse” as a modifying phrase, οἱσυμβαλλόμενοι clearly refers to contributing orlending, as in PlatoLeg. 921d ὁπόσα δανεισμῷ ξυμβάλλει τις, οὗτος τῇ δραχμῇ ἑκάστου μηνὸς ἐπωβελίαν κατατιθέτω or Timaeus 47c λόγος τε γὰρ ἐπʼ αὐτὰ ταῦτα τέτακται, μεγίστην ξυμβαλλόμενος εἰς αὐτὰ μοῖραν. The nouns ζυγόςand σταθμός have to do with weighing; ζυγός denotes the contraption for determining wight, and σταθμός tends to refer to the weights used in the contraption.
7 The first-hand of Q wrote αὐτὸν; the nu was later deleted, matching S, A, and B (Rahlfs and Ziegler).
8 LEH and BDAG note that when intransitive ἐπιστρέφω means “return;” when transitive, it means “turn.”Both ἐπιστρέφω and ἀποστρέφω typically have שׁוב behind them.
9 The repentance here was interpreted by Eusebius as a return to correct arguments that lead to recognizing his divinity (ἐπιστρέψατε ὀρθοῖς λογισμοῖς εἰς ἔννοιαν τῆς ἐμῆς θεότητος, 2.31).
10 Again, the ability to predict and perform promised events is presented as evidence that God is real.John 13:19 has Jesus claiming to predict happenings before they take place, using the words ἀπʼ ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵνα πιστεύσητε ὅταν γένηται ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι.
1 Now the addressee shifts to Babylon, the tender and delicate daughter of the Chaldeans.
2 The noun ἄλευρον refers to wheat flour used to make bread (Matt 13:33; Luke 13:21).
3 The former delicate lifestyle will be reversed. As Ottley noted, G was understandably at a loss when encountering אפגע, so he reached into his grab-bag of favourite words and pulled out παραδίδωμι. The resulting statement is unexpected, since usually παραδίδωμι is undesireable, and God is promising not to do so. Ottley concluded that God is warning that Babylon will be judged not by humans, but by God, but in light of the following verse, this could be intended as a positive thing.
4 Where the Hebrew speaks of the one who redeems “us,” G translated the one who redeems “you” (ὁ ῥυσάμενός σε), continuing the message that God favours the addressees. Eusebius noted that the interpretation depends on which version is read, since Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion all vary in their translations (2.32). Only G has “you;” the other versions all have “us,” and Eusebius commented only on the other versions.
9 The words τὰ δύο ταῦτα ἐν μιᾷ ἡμέρᾳ χηρεία καὶ ἀτεκνία ἥξει ἐξαίφνης ἐπὶ σὲ are absent in B due to the repeated ἐπὶ σὲ. Q, S, Ziegler, and Swete spell φαρμακείᾳ as φαρμακίᾳ. Rev 18:8 continues the allusion by predicting the woman’s single-day double tragedy: διὰ τοῦτο ἐνμιᾷἡμέρᾳἥξουσιν αἱ πληγαὶ αὐτῆς, θάνατος καὶ πένθος καὶ λιμός, καὶ ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται, ὅτι ἰσχυρὸς κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ κρίνας αὐτήν. Revelation 18:23 uses the exact phrase from Isa 47:9: καὶ φῶς λύχνου οὐ μὴ φάνῃ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι, καὶ φωνὴ νυμφίου καὶ νύμφης οὐ μὴ ἀκουσθῇ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι· ὅτι οἱ ἔμποροί σου ἦσαν οἱ μεγιστᾶνες τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἐντῇφαρμακείᾳσου ἐπλανήθησαν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη.
10 After γνῶθι, Q, A (Rahlfs and Ziegler) read, and S corrector ca added ὅτι. Then (according to codexsinaiticus.org) S corrector cb2 deleted the addition, leaving only γνῶθι again. This is an unusual case in that Q and Ziegler disagree with cb2’s change. Instead of the genitive singular πονηρίας, “wickedness” (the reading of Q’s corrector, A, B, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) or πορνίας, illicit sexual activity (the reading of S), the original-hand of Q has πονηρας, which could be accented as πονηρᾶς (genitive singular), “evil” or as πονηράς (accusative plural), “wicked” or “evil things.”The “understanding” refers to the witchcraft in the previous verse.
11 Instead of שחרה “its dawning,” G read שוחה “a pit.”
13 Babylonians had a reputation for astrological proficiency. Eusebius pointed to Daniel as confirmation of this reputation (2.32).
There will be no salvation for you(47:14-15)[[@Bible:Isa 48:1-2]]
1Israel is addressed with an accusation that although they swear by God’s name, they do not do so sincerely.
2 Matthew 4:5 refers to Jerusalem as the holy city in the story of Jesus’ temptation: Τότε παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ.
6 Although Israel was informed, they did not listen or understand. Papyrus Alex. 203 from the third or fourth centuries covers parts of Isa 48:6-18 (Carlini 1978). When the adverb νῦν has a definite article, it indicates the present time. The phrase ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι is used also in Revelation 1:19: γράψον οὖν ἃ εἶδες καὶ ἃ εἰσὶν καὶ ἃμέλλειγενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα.
7 Where the Hebrew has the second negator ולוא after “and past day,” G put it before this phrase. According to Eusebius, the addressees were unaware of what was going to happen until God told them (2.33).
8 Here γινώσκω translates שׁמע and ἐπίσταμαι translates ידע. Although ידע is the usual Hebrew behind ἐπίσταμαι, the reverse is not true; ידע is usually translated as γινώσκω and שׁמע usually becomes ἀκούω. There is considerable overlap between the semantic ranges of γινώσκω and ἐπίσταμαι, but γινώσκω is the broader term and relates to familiarity generally, whereas ἐπίσταμαι typically refers to mental understanding. Although the combination of the participle and cognate indicative ἀθετῶνἀθετήσεις is not standard Greek, Eusebius did not comment on this grammatical peculiarity. His comment Οἶδα γὰρ καὶ πρὸ τούτου γινώσκων, ὡς ἀθετῶν ἀθετήσεις (2.32) indicates that he understood the participle adverbially “rebellingly, you will rebel,” rather than substantivally “you, a rebel, will rebel.” Although the verb is future in the clause καὶἄνομοςἔτιἐκκοιλίαςκληθήσῃ, Eusebius interpreted it to mean that already by the time of birth the addressee was considered a transgressor (πρὶν γεννηθῆναί σε ἄνομος καὶ παράνομος ἐκέκλησο, 2.33).
9 Instead of אאריך “I will defer,” G read אראך “I will show.”
10 The placement of the negator οὐχ before ἕνεκεν rather than the verb πέπρακαindicates that the selling took place, but it was not for money.Eusebius explained that it was for a different reason: to help, to chasten, because of sins and impiety, quoting Isaiah 50:1 “for your sins you were sold” (2.33).
11 The Hebrew has a repetition למענילמעני that is represented only once by G ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ. Where the Hebrew has איכה G (inexplicably) has τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα.
12 Revelation 1:17 alludes to the claim, “I am the first” and the last:καὶ ἔθηκεν τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπʼ ἐμὲ λέγων· μὴ φοβοῦ· ἐγώεἰμι ὁ πρῶτοςκαὶ ὁ ἔσχατος.
13 Paul uses the vocabulary of “calling” to refer to God’s creative acts in Romans 4:17 καθὼς γέγραπται ὅτι πατέρα πολλῶν ἐθνῶν τέθεικά σε, κατέναντι οὗ ἐπίστευσεν θεοῦ τοῦ ζῳοποιοῦντος τοὺς νεκροὺς καὶ καλοῦντος τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς ὄντα. The adverb ἅμα in G tends to be used to express unity rather than simulteneity. Twice ἅμα is used as a preposition with the dative (18:6; 24:14), also expressing unity.
14 Instead of MT כלכם“all of you,” G read 1QIsaaכולם “all of them.” Instead of זְרוֹע “arm,” G read זֶרַע “seed.”
16 In Sinaiticus, the reading ἐλάλησα οὐδὲ ἐν τόπῳ γῆς σκοτεινῷ (the reading also of A, except Ottley spelled σκοτινῷ, and followed by Rahlfs) was shortened by ca to simply ἐλάλησα (which is what Q has and what Ziegler followed); B has λελάληκα. Until this point, God has been speaking in the first person, but here Lord appears as the subject in the third person in a sentence with a first person object (“Lord sent me”). So it is unclear who is the speaker in the first half of this verse.
19 The meaning of οὐ μή with the aorist subjunctive is debated (Porter 19.2.1). Smyth noted that “οὐ μή with the subjunctive of the second person in the dramatic poets occasionally expresses a strong prohibition” (1800.c) and from there “οὐ μή with the aorist (less often the present) subjunctive” became an emphatic denial (1804).
20 This is the first time G has referred to Lord’s δοῦλος. In 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21, 26; 45:4, the figure known in English as the “servant” of the Lord is called παῖς. The only other mentions are in 49:3, 5, 7. So δοῦλος for עבד is clustered in 48:20-49:7, but with one intervening παῖς in 49:6. Revelation 18:4 alludes to coming out of Babylon: Καὶ ἤκουσα ἄλλην φωνὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ λέγουσαν· ἐξέλθατε ὁ λαός μου ἐξ αὐτῆς ἵνα μὴ συγκοινωνήσητε ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις αὐτῆς, καὶ ἐκ τῶν πληγῶν αὐτῆς ἵνα μὴ λάβητε.
21 The (liquid) future of πίνωdoes not have the ν because the ν is added to the root *πι to form the present stem.
22 The infinitive χαίρεινis a verbal noun, which in English corresponds to “rejoicing” rather than “to rejoice.”
1 Since the verb is second person imperative, νῆσοι … ἔθνη is the vocative addressee. The parallelism and punctuation indicates ἔθνη is a vocative, in parallel with νῆσοι, which would translate as “Listen to me, islands, and pay attention, nations! It will stand through much time.” Unless we are to suppose Lord was named and was born from his mother’s womb, the speech from Lord must end after λέγει Κύριος, and the prophet begins to speak. Eusebius quoted 49:1 (and 6 and 7) to say the Gentiles are called, to refute the claim of
“the circumcision” that they are preferred or privileged, and to predict the birth of Christ (Dem. ev. 2.1.24; 2.2.14).
3 Lord addresses the prophet as his servant, Israel. Eusebius (2.35) identified the servant as Jesus, alluding to his taking the form of a servant in Philippians 2:7. Because the Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16 and 19:25, Arie van der Kooij suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” in Isa 42:1 also refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as here in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394).
4 The prophet (the servant, Israel), responds to Lord’s commission. Paul alluded to laboring in vain in Phil 2:16: λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες, εἰς καύχημα ἐμοὶ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα. Eusebius (2.35) connected this vain labour to those that persisted in unbelief in Romans 11:23.
5 The servant introduces Lord’s words, but they do not appear immediately after the clause containing the phrase οὕτως λέγει Κύριος. Instead, the servant includes a parenthetical note about being himself gathered, before resuming his account of Lord’s words after the resumptive phrase καὶ εἶπέν μοι in 49:6. Eusebius continued identifying the servant as the Son, who was originally sent to Israel, according to Matt 10:5-6. Arie van der Kooij argued that Greek Isa 11:11-16 and 49:5-6 (in contrast to the Hebrew) distinguish two groups in exile: (a) the people of Israel, and (b) a particular group of Jews. G presents the Servant in exile who “shall be gathered” (49:5) as “my people in Egypt” in 11:16. In van der Kooij’s
view, this group is the followers of Onias IV in Egypt (1997b, 395). Instead of וישׂראל לא יאסף (MT) or וישראל לויאסף (1QIsaa), G read וישראלואאסף, with waw-aleph instead of aleph-yod or waw-yod, and one lamed instead of two.
6 The clause μέγασοίἐστιντὸκληθῆναίσεπαῖδάμου has an infinitive as the subject. One might be tempted to translate, “It is a great thing for you to be called my servant” but that would disregard one of the second person pronouns.Eusebius did not interpret the phrase κληθῆναί σε παῖδά μου in reference to the Father/Son relationship, but rather to the servanthood of Jesus, as described Philippians 2:7.
6 Afterτέθεικάσεεἰς(the reading also of A, followed by Ziegler), S and B (followed by Rahlfs) add the wordsδιαθήκηνγένουςεἰς.Eusebius also quotedκαὶ ἔδωκά σε εἰς διαθήκην ἐθνῶν, but that is probably from 49:8.Luke 2:32 refers to the light revealed to the Gentiles: φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ. Acts 1:8 uses the expression referring to the extent of the mission to the end of the earth: καὶ ἔσεσθέ μου μάρτυρες ἔν τε Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ καὶ Σαμαρίᾳ καὶ ἕωςἐσχάτουτῆςγῆς. The tribes of Israel are mentioned in Rev 7:4, Καὶ ἤκουσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐσφραγισμένων, ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες, ἐσφραγισμένοι ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ; Acts 13:47 quotes the verse more completely: τέθεικά σε εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν τοῦ εἶναί σε εἰς σωτηρίαν ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς. Van de Sandt discussed the function this prophecy served in Luke’s conception of the role Israel played in the salvation of the Gentiles (van de Sandt 1994).
7 Instead of τῶν δούλων (the reading of Q, S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has τὸν δοῦλον, supported only by manuscripts from the 9th century on (89, 90, 130, 311), Jerome, and the MT.
8 There is an exact citation of this verse (except for the variant σοιin Sinaiticus) in 2 Cor 6:2: λέγει γάρ· καιρῷδεκτῷἐπήκουσάσουκαὶἐνἡμέρᾳσωτηρίαςἐβοήθησάσοι. The phrase Καιρῷ δεκτῷ is linked with salvation (ἡμέρᾳ σωτηρίας) here.
9 Luke 2:32 mentions salvation to the end of the earth in a quote of a preceding verse (49:6) and alludes to revelation to those in darkness φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
10 The verb normally spelled διψήσουσιν is in Q spelled διψάσουσιν (the reading also of B and S); there is a lacuna (διψα´σουσιν) where it appears an iota may have deleted. Q’s marginal note records the reading of Theodotion and Symmachus as διψήσουσιν, and identifies the reading of Aquila (διψάσουσιν) as that of the Seventy. Above the alpha, one of Q’s later correctors added eta, allowing for διψήσουσιν to be read. John 7:37 alludes to the satisfaction of thirst: Ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ μεγάλῃ τῆς ἑορτῆς εἱστήκει ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἔκραξεν λέγων· ἐάν τις διψᾷ ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω. Rom 9:16 mentions the god who shows mercy: ἄρα οὖν οὐ τοῦ θέλοντος οὐδὲ τοῦ τρέχοντος ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἐλεῶντος θεοῦ. Rev 7:16-17 has οὐ πεινάσουσιν ἔτι οὐδὲ διψήσουσιν ἔτι, οὐδὲ μὴ πέσῃ ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς ὁ ἥλιος οὐδὲ πᾶν καῦμα, ὅτι τὸ ἀρνίον τὸ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ θρόνου ποιμανεῖ αὐτούς καὶ ὁδηγήσει αὐτοὺς ἐπὶ ζωῆς πηγὰς ὑδάτων.
11 In commenting on 49:11, Eusebius noted that there are three ways to interpret Zion and Jerusalem: (1) the Jewish way; (2) every religious government; (3) the angelic city in heaven (Gal 4:26). He considered this prophecy an example of meaning (2): the religious government of the Jews had been converted into the church of the nations (2.35).
12 Luke 13:29 mentions coming from all four cardinal directions: καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ.
16 That supernatural devotion is symbolized by painting walls on God’s hands, an image that Eusebius interpreted to mean that the true Zion is invincible and eternal (on God’s hands); religious government is this city of God (2.36).
17 Instead of בָנַיִךְ “your sons,” G read בֹּנַיִךְ “your builders,” along with 1QIsaa בוניך.
18 Paul quoted ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος as an oath formula in Rom 14:11: ζῶἐγώ, λέγεικύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ. Paul combines 49:18 with 45:23.
19 The reading στενοχωρήσει, which is also in Q, A, and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) was changed in Sinaiticus by scribe B himself, from στενοχωρήσῃ. The intransitive use of στενοχωρέω is unusual. Normally this verb is passive expressing a crowded state, or has an object, expressing confinement. The present participle οἱκαταπίνοντέςσεindicates that the swallowing is ongoing.
20 Although the notion of making room is unusual for נגשׁ, this sense appears also in Gen 19:9, where it is translated ἀφίστημι in the story of Lot in Sodom.
21 The nominative adjective μόνη provides a characteristic of the nominative pronoun ἐγώ. Whether that should be translated as “I have been left alone” or “I alone have been left” depends on whether the meaning of the Greek is that
the speaker is the only person left, or that she has been deserted. The context and parallelism (surprise that she would have sons) would indicate that her desertion is in view.
22 Luke 15:5 speaks of carrying a sheep on one’s shoulders: καὶ εὑρὼν ἐπιτίθησιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὤμους αὐτοῦ χαίρων.
23 In the context of bowing, ἐπὶπρόσωποντῆς γῆς would indicate the direction or extent of the bowing: toward or all the way to the ground. Rev 3:9 uses the image of compelling authorities to bow before the addressees: ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἠγάπησά σε.
24 The rhetorical question presents the expectation that one cannot steal from the powerful. According to Eusebius, this “giant” is the devil (2.36).
25 The force of the participle λαμβάνωνis uncertain; it could be temporal “when he takes from a strong man” or concessive “although he takes from a strong man.”The parallel ἐάνindicates that these are hypothetical cases, so the English “when” is an appropriate translation, but in a casuistic rather than temporal sense.
I am he who rescues you(49:25-26)[[@Bible:Isa 49:24-26]]
26 The verb ἀντιλαμβάνω in the middle denotes helping, and takes its object in the genitive (ἰσχύος). Rev 16:6 refers to drinking blood: ὅτι αἷμα ἁγίων καὶ προφητῶν ἐξέχεαν καὶ αἷμα αὐτοῖς δέδωκας πιεῖν, ἄξιοί εἰσιν.
1 The dative pronoun τίνιis interrogative (“to which?”), and matches the dative ὑπόχρεῳ, for “to which debtor.”
2 The adjective in the phrase θήσωποταμοὺςἐρήμους could be functioning attributively (“I will make rivers desolate”) or substantivally (“I will turn rivers into deserts”).In Isa 5:9, a plural subject “cities” become a singular ἔρημος, indicating a substantival function; similarly in 15:6 a neuter subject “water” becomes a non-neuter ἔρημος.
3 Revelation 6:12 also compares the darkened sun to sackcloth: καὶ σεισμὸς μέγας ἐγένετο καὶ ὁ ἥλιος ἐγένετο μέλας ὡςσάκκος τρίχινος καὶ ἡ σελήνη ὅλη ἐγένετο ὡς αἷμα.
4 Instead of παιδίας “childhood” (the reading also of S and B), A has σοφίας; Q’s corrector (Rahlfs and Ziegler) spelled it παιδείας “instruction,” which is a defensible reading because the two words are homophones. This spelling variation appears also in the next verse.
5 According to Eusebius, the absence of resistance and opposition is due to God’s will that the one falsely accused should remain silent (2.37).
6 LEH designates ἐμπτυσμάτων as a neologism. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus advises such a non-retaliative response when struck on the cheek (Matt 5:39): ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλʼ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα σου, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην. Jesus applied this prophecy to himself according to Mark 10:34: καὶ ἐμπαίξουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ μαστιγώσουσιν αὐτὸν. Matt 26:67 presents Jesus behaving according to this prophecy: Τότε ἐνέπτυσαν εἰς τὸπρόσωπον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκολάφισαν αὐτόν, οἱ δὲ ἐράπισαν.
7 The image of a stony face was recognized by Eusebius as a symbol of resolve (2.37).
8 After a verb of perception such as ἔγνων, ὅτι is not causal but introduces what is perceived, so there is no question about the interpretation of the first ὅτι.
The meaning of the second ὅτι is less clear. In the absence of a conjunction, the causal sense is likely what was intended: the reason he will not be put to shame is because his defender is coming. Paul alluded to the one who justifies in Rom 8:33: τίς ἐγκαλέσει κατὰ ἐκλεκτῶν θεοῦ; θεὸς ὁ δικαιῶν.
9 Hebrews 1:11 quotes the line about becoming old like a garment, changing the second person verb to the third person: αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις, καὶ πάντεςὡςἱμάτιονπαλαιωθήσονται. 1 Pet 3:13 asks the same rhetorical question about who can harm one who is in the right: Καὶ τίς ὁ κακώσων ὑμᾶς ἐὰν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ζηλωταὶ γένησθε;
10 The article rarely appears before Κύριος as it does here in the phrase τὸν Κύριον. The third person αὐτοῦ indicates a parenthetical aside between the nominative οἱ πορευόμενοι and its corresponding verb πεποίθατε. The perfect πεποίθατε must be indicative rather than imperative because the perfect imperative is expressed periphrastically.
11 G’s κατισχύω for מאזרי indicates that the conjectural emendation to מאירי is probably incorrect.
1 Paul alluded to pursuing justice in Rom 9:31: Ἰσραὴλ δὲ διώκων νόμονδικαιοσύνης εἰς νόμον οὐκ ἔφθασεν.
2 In addition to reading ארבהו “increase him,” G also read אהבהו “love him.”
3 Instead of ὡς παράδεισον (spelled παράδισον in Q), S and B add the words καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς ὡς παράδεισον; they were deleted by S corrector cb2, whose reading agrees with A (Rahlfs and Ziegler); Ottley has καὶ θήσω τὰ ἔρημα αὐτῆς ὡς παράδεισον, καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς in
angle brackets. The first-hand of Q does not have Κυρίου (along with 198); however, Q’s margins allow for the addition of καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς ὡς παράδισον (right margin) and Κυρίου (left); ΠΙΠΙ is given in a separate note on Κυρίου. The vocabulary items εὐφροσύνηνκαὶἀγαλλίαμαamost always occurtogether.
4 According to Eusebius, the prophet is no longer addressing Israel but the people that have come from the nations, saved by God’s grace (Eph 2:8) (2.38).
5 Paul alluded to the revealing of righteousness in Rom 1:17: δικαιοσύνη γὰρ θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἀποκαλύπτεται ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν, and in Rom 3:21, Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται μαρτυρουμένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν.
6 Although Ziegler’s best explanation (1934, 157–58), agreeing with Ottley (1904, 1:2:338-339) that G’s translation ἐστερεώθη was the result of working mechanically and not taking the context into account, Peter Katz (1951, 263–64) noted Paul de Lagarde’s explanation that ἐστερεώθη is a corruption of ηρεωθη = ἠραιώθη from ἀραιόομαι “to be rarefied.” The corruption was from reading ΚΑΠΝΟΣΗΡΕΩΘΗ as ΚΑΠΝΟΣ ΟΣΗΡΕΩΘΗ and writing ΚΑΠΝΟΣ ΕΣΤΕΡΕΩΘΗ. The position of the adverb κάτω indicates that it is modifying the noun γῆν rather than the verb ἐμβλέψατε. Like God’s salvation here, Mark 13:31 claims that Jesus’ words are more permanent than heaven and earth. Hebrews 1:1 quotes Isaiah, changing the singular verb to a plural: αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις, καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται.
7 Matt 5:11uses the vocabulary of reproach: μακάριοί ἐστε ὅταν ὀνειδίσωσιν ὑμᾶς καὶ διώξωσιν καὶ εἴπωσιν πᾶν πονηρὸν καθʼ ὑμῶν ψευδόμενοι ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ. Rom 2:15 alludes to those who have the law in their hearts: οἵτινες ἐνδείκνυνται τὸ ἔργον τοῦ νόμου γραπτὸν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν, συμμαρτυρούσης αὐτῶν τῆς συνειδήσεως καὶ μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων τῶν λογισμῶν κατηγορούντων ἢ καὶ ἀπολογουμένων.
8 The English translation of ὡς as “while” and δέ as “however” conveys more than the lexical value of these Greek words; this translation conveys the contrast produced by the combination of ὡςand δέ.According to Matt 6:19, Jesus refers to moths eating: Μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅπου σὴς καὶ βρῶσις ἀφανίζει καὶ ὅπου κλέπται διορύσσουσιν καὶ κλέπτουσιν. Paul refers to the righteousness of God in Rom 1:17 (δικαιοσύνη γὰρ θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἀποκαλύπτεται ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν) and Rom 3:21 (Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται μαρτυρουμένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν). James 5:2 refers to moth-eaten clothing: ὁ πλοῦτος ὑμῶν σέσηπεν καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια ὑμῶν σητόβρωτα γέγονεν.
9 The news of God’s ransoming initiative is enthusiastically presented with a series of imperatives to awake. The “arm” according to G belongs to Jerusalem, a name which (as Eusebius noted) does not appear in the Hebrew or other Greek translations (2.39), likely due to G’s aversion to anthropomorphism. The first-hand of Q divided ἐν between lines rather than using his more common method of omitting nu as the ultimate letter of a line and marking the penultimate with an overbar; the nu was later deleted and an overbar added to the epsilon in keeping with Q’s standard style.
The ransomed will return with joy(51:9-13)[[@Bible:Isa 51:9-11]]
10 The verb τίθημιis used with a double accusative to indicate a transformation. In this case, the depth is transformed into a path.Rev 16:12speaks of drying the Euphrates to make a path: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου.
11 Instead of γὰρ τῆς κεφαλῆς (the reading also of A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has τῆς κεφαλῆς γὰρ; B has κεφαλῆς γὰρ; Q’s reading is probably the result of smoothing. The genitive adjective αἰωνίου matches the case of ἀγαλλιάματος and also εὐφροσύνης, since αἰωνίου has the same form for masculine and feminine genders. Both ἀγαλλίαμα and ἀγαλλίασις appear here; this is the only instance of ἀγαλλίασιςin Isaiah. LEH designates both nouns as neologisms; they are exclusively biblical terms and carry the same meaning. Although Rev 21:4 shares no significant vocabulary, it clearly alludes to the ending of sorrow: καὶ ἐξαλείψει πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν.
12 The syntax of γνῶθιτίναεὐλαβηθεῖσαἐφοβήθηςis unusual. Eusebius has γνῶθι τίς οὖσα ἐφοβήθης, the reading of B. Rahlfs and Ziegler follow the reading of Q, S corrector cb2 and A; this reading is the same as S except that S (and Q’s corrector) adds σύ after γνῶθι. Ottley said εὐλαβηθεῖσα must be an intrusion from 57:11, and τίνα might have come from the Hebrew, readingאת־מיinstead of מי־את. Nevertheless, the grammar of S (and Q’s corrector) is unambiguous: the nominative σύ refer to the addressee of the imperative. The accusative τίναis the object of the main clause’s verb γνῶθι “know” and introduces the subordinate clause as its object as well.The nominative εὐλαβηθεῖσα“wary” refers to the addressee as well, describing the agent of the second person verb ἐφοβήθης: the addressee is advised to know the mortal of whom she was wary and feared.
13 The meaning of ὃντρόπον is normally the manner in which something takes place, typically in a comparison which we would express in English using “just as,” which is how Silva handled it. Ottley translated, “(it was) as (though).” Eusebius is no help, since he avoided this phrase and simply identified the oppressor with the one wanting to kill by placing them in apposition: τοῦ θλίβοντός σε, τοῦ βουλευσαμένου ἐξᾶραί σε.
14 The word σῴζεσθαί is spelled σώζεσθαί by Ottley and Swete.
15 Although Ottley suggested that the Hebrew behind ὁ ταράσσων might mean “that calmeth,” Eusebius did not mention any such interpretation in the other versions (2.39).
16 Theverb θεμελιόωis used in Isaiah only in 14:32, 44:28; 48:13, and twice in this chapter: 51:13 and 16.
17 The two accusatives τὸποτήριον and τὸκόνδυ are in apposition, both modified by a genitive noun, and together both are the objects of the two verbsἐξέπιες and ἐξεκένωσας. According to Matt 26:39, Jesus asked that “this cup” be removed from him, as something to be dreaded: πάτερ μου, εἰ δυνατόν ἐστιν, παρελθάτω ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο. Rev 14:10 also alludes to drinking the cup of God’s wrath: καὶ αὐτὸς πίεται ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦθυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ κεκερασμένου ἀκράτου ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ βασανισθήσεται ἐν πυρὶ καὶ θείῳ ἐνώπιον ἀγγέλων ἁγίων καὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ ἀρνίου.
18 Instead of מנהל “guiding,” G read מנחם “comforting.”
19 Swete spelled συλλυπηθήσεται as συνλυπηθήσεται.
20 The expression ὡς σευτλίον ἡμίεφθον “like a half-cooked corn-rent,” is puzzling. The meaning of the Hebrew כתו מיכמר (1QIsaa) or כתוא מכמר (MT) is obscure. Ottley presented Burkitt’s suggestion that G read כתאמכמר as כתאמךמר, which would mean “bitter herb” (1904, 1:2:231). Eusebius noted that instead of ὡς σευτλίον ἡμίεφθον other translations read ὡς ὄρυξ ἠμφιβληστρευμένος or συνειλημμένος, and explained that ὄρυξ was a kind of bird (2.40).
21 The phrase οὐκ ἀπὸ οἴνου recalls 29:9 and 28:1.
22 The dreaded cup, as previously noted, appears in Matt 26:39 as τὸποτήριον τοῦτο and Rev 14:10 as ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ.
23 The adjective ἴσος prototypically indicates equality and sameness, but in reference to land it means the terrain is level or flat, as in Xenophon, Anabasis 4.6.18.
1 Jerusalem is called the holy city in Matt 4:5 (Τότε παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ), and Rev 21:2 (καὶ τὴν πόλιν τὴν ἁγίαν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καινὴν εἶδον καταβαίνουσαν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ
ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡτοιμασμένην ὡς νύμφην κεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς). Later in the same chapter (Rev 21:27), Revelation alludes to the image of nothing impure entering this city: καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος.
2 This holy city of Jerusalem is called to rise up. Ottley pointed out that the reading ἔκδυσαι (the reading of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is likely a misreading of the visually similar ΕΚΛΥΣΑΙ, as B has it; Q reads ἔνδυσαι.
4 I suspect βίᾳ was selected for its intial sound, which is similar to באפס. Isaiah is the book from the Hebrew Bible that uses βία the most (5 times); the other instances are in 17:13; 28:2; 30:30; 63:1, all in the dative. According to Eusebius, this “force” was on the part of the Egyptians and later the Assyrians, and he noted the other translators had “for nothing” or “for no reason” instead (2.40).
5 The second person plural ἐστε is the reading also of S and B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; A instead has the third person singular ἔσται, which could be simply a spelling variation, since the two are homophones.
Lord’s name is blasphemed on your account(52:5)[[@Bible:Isa 52:4-6]]
5 Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; however, it was Q’s corrector who deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, here in 52:5; A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the standard ἐλήμφθη; S has ἐλήμφη (though the transcription on codexsinaiticus.org adds the theta to read ἐλήμφθη). The phrase διὰπαντόςis a spatial phrase referring to everywhere. Paul cited this verse, saying God’s name is blasphemed among the nations because of his readers (Rom 2:24): τὸ γὰρ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦδιʼ ὑμᾶςβλασφημεῖταιἐντοῖςἔθνεσιν, καθὼς γέγραπται. Similarly, 1 Timothy 6:1 refers to blasphemy against God’s name and the teaching: Ὅσοι εἰσὶν ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι, τοὺς ἰδίους δεσπότας πάσης τιμῆς ἀξίους ἡγείσθωσαν, ἵνα μὴ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία βλασφημῆται. When 2 Pet 2:2 mentions blaspheming, the connection to Isaiah is less explicit: καὶ πολλοὶ ἐξακολουθήσουσιν αὐτῶν ταῖς ἀσελγείαις διʼ οὓς ἡ ὁδὸς τῆς ἀληθείας βλασφημηθήσεται. Revelation 16:9 alludes to the blasphemy against God’s name: καὶ ἐκαυματίσθησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι καῦμα μέγα καὶ ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἔχοντος τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ τὰς πληγὰς ταύτας.
6 αὐτόςis not exclusively a third person pronoun; since it is nominative here it emphasizes the subject, even though the verb is in the first person, hence the translation “I myself.”Where Q has τὸν Κύριον,the older manuscripts (S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have τὸ ὄνομά μου; Q’s margin contains τὸ ὄνομά μου as an alternate reading above a transliteration of the tetragrammaton.
7 The phrase βασιλεύσεισουὁθεόςuses a verb cognate to “king,” so one could alternatively translate, “God will be your king.”The feet of one bringing good news are alluded to in Rom 10:15 (ὡς ὡραῖοι οἱ πόδες τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων τὰ ἀγαθά) and Eph 6:15 (καὶ ὑποδησάμενοι τοὺς πόδας ἐν ἑτοιμασίᾳ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς εἰρήνης), and the good news of peace is also alluded to in Acts 10:36 (τὸν λόγον ὃν ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ εὐαγγελιζόμενοςεἰρήνην διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος) and Eph 2:17 (καὶ ἐλθὼν εὐηγγελίσατο εἰρήνην ὑμῖν τοῖς μακρὰν καὶ εἰρήνην τοῖς ἐγγύς).
8 Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐλεήσῃ; the spelling of S ἐλεήσει was confirmed by corrector cb3, indicating his role was to darken faint lettering.
9 The merciful rescue of Jerusalem is mentioned in the story of Simeon in Luke 2:25-38, but with no verbal borrowing from Isaiah.
10 God is expected to make his saving power evident to all peoples. Eusebius identified that “holy arm” with “God the Word” (τὸν γὰρ βραχίονατὸνἅγιοναὐτοῦ, αὐτὸς δὲ ἦν ὁ θεὸς λόγος, 2.41). The
revealing denoted by ἀποκαλύπτω indicates that something is made evident. This visibility is physical only in Isa 47:2, where a veil is removed; in Isa 53:1 it is in parallel with being believed; and in Isa 56:1 in parallel with approaching (here too it is salvation). The noun βραχίων is physical only in Isa 9:20; 15:2; 40:11; 44:12; elsewhere in Isaiah βραχίων refers to strength. So the revealing of the arm is not likely intended to evoke rolling up one’s sleeve.
11 The departure from their midst is quoted in 2 Cor 6:17 (Διὸ ἐξέλθατεἐκμέσουαὐτῶν καὶ ἀφορίσθητε, λέγει κύριος) and alluded to in Rev 18:4 (ἐξέλθατε ὁ λαός μου ἐξ αὐτῆς).
12 According to Eusebius, those sent out were the apostles, who went to the nations not because they were driven out but because they were eager to make disciples (2.41).
13 The “lifting up” of the Son of Man is mentioned in John 3:14: Καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. The glorification of God’s servant is alluded to in Acts 3:13: ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν, ἐδόξασεν τὸν παῖδα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. Craig Evans has argued that Jesus’ rejection is explained in John 12:36-41 by identifying Jesus as the Servant of the Lord of Isaiah 52-53 (Evans 1987).
14 Three indicators make reading the neuter τὸ εἶδος as nominative rather than accusative preferable: (a) ἀδοξήσει is normally intransitive, and therefore typically has a subject but not an object; (b) τὸ εἶδός σου is in parallel with the nominative ἡ δόξα σου; (c) the prepositional phrase ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων fits better if it indicates the group doing the despising (“your appearance will be held in contempt by humans”) than if a subject (ὁ παῖς) is imported from earlier in the paragraph (“my servant will hold your appearance in contempt from humans”).
15 Paul quoted οἷςοὐκἀνηγγέληπερὶαὐτοῦὄψονται, καὶοἳοὐκἀκηκόασινσυνήσουσιν verbatim in Rom 15:21. He also mentioned what eyes have not seen and ears not heard in 1 Cor 2:9 (ἀλλὰ καθὼς γέγραπται· ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν
καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν), citing as scripture words that are closer to Isa 64:4. Matt 13:16 also uses the image of eyes seeing and ears hearing, but the verbal parallels are weak (ὑμῶν δὲ μακάριοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὅτι βλέπουσιν καὶ τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν ὅτι ἀκούουσιν).
1 The spelling of ἀπεκαλύφθη (as it is in Q, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler and John) was changed by S corrector ca from ἀπεκαλύφη. Luke 24:25 alludes to the resistance to the prophet’s message: ὦ ἀνόητοι καὶ βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῦ πιστεύειν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν οἷς ἐλάλησαν οἱ προφῆται. John 12:38 has a verbatim citation τίς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; καὶ ὁ βραχίων κυρίου τίνι ἀπεκαλύφθη; Paul cited this prophecy in Rom 10:16: Ἀλλʼ οὐ πάντες ὑπήκουσαν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ. Ἠσαΐας γὰρ λέγει· κύριε, τίςἐπίστευσεντῇἀκοῇἡμῶν;
3 The phrase ἄνθρωποςἐνπληγῇὢν denotes that the person is stricken.Mark 9:12 alludes to the suffering mentioned in this prophecy: καὶ πῶς γέγραπται ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἵνα πολλὰ πάθῃ καὶ ἐξουδενηθῇ. Human appearance is alluded to in Phil 2:7: ἀλλʼ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος· καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος.
4 The image of bearing sins is referenced three times in the New Testament. Matt 8:17 has Αὐτὸς τὰς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν ἔλαβεν καὶ τὰς νόσους ἐβάστασεν. 1 Pet 2:24 has τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν, conflating with 53:12. 1 John 3:5 has καὶ οἴδατε ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη, ἵνα τὰςἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, καὶ ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν.
5 Instead of παιδία, “childhood” (which is also the reading of S, A, and B), Q’s corrector and Rahlfs and Ziegler have the homophone παιδεία, “instruction.” Paul in Rom 4:25 credited “our sins” as the reason for his betrayal: ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν, and in Rom 5:1 he connected this justification with peace: Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. In 1 Cor 15:3 Paul connected Christ’s death with this prophecy: Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφάς. According to Barnabas (5.2), this Scripture relates partly to Israel and partly to “us.” Eusebius (Comm. Isa. 2.42) interpreted this to mean that the suffering and discipline that should have fallen on us “fell on him for our peace with God.” Athanasius wrote that the suffering was not for his sake but for “the immortality and salvation of all”(Inc. 34.2; cf. 36.4). According to Justin Martyr, the stripes heal those who approach the Father by Him (Dial. 17.1; 137.1); further, the “Father of all” wanted his anointed to take upon himself the curses of the whole human family (Dial. 95.3).
6 Quoting πάντες ὡς πρόβατα ἐπλανήθημεν, 1 Pet 2:25 has ἦτε γὰρ ὡςπρόβαταπλανώμενοι.
7 According to Matt 27:12; Mark 14:61, Jesus remained silent during his interrogation. In Acts 8:32, this is the passage the eunuch asks Philip about, quoting it verbatim: ἡ δὲ περιοχὴ τῆς γραφῆς ἣν ἀνεγίνωσκεν ἦν αὕτη· ὡςπρόβατονἐπὶσφαγὴνἤχθηκαὶὡςἀμνὸςἐναντίοντοῦκείραντοςαὐτὸνἄφωνος, οὕτωςοὐκἀνοίγειτὸστόμααὐτοῦ. He is called a sin-removing lamb in John 1:29 (ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου), and compared to a slaughtered lamb in Rev 5:6 (ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς ὡς ἐσφαγμένον); the slaughtering is mentioned again a few verses later in Rev 5:9: ἐσφάγης καὶ ἠγόρασας τῷ θεῷ ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς καὶ γλώσσης καὶ λαοῦ καὶ ἔθνους.
8 The prototypical meaning of τὴνγενεὰναὐτοῦτίςδιηγήσεται; would be “who will explain his family?” Eusebiusdescribed these words as referring to his birth: ἐπὶ τὴν τῆς γενέσεως αὐτοῦ φαντασίαν (2.42). The proposition ἀπόgoverning τῶνἀνομιῶντοῦλαοῦμουindicates not the location from which but the reason they were led (ἤχθηεἰςθάνατον).
9 The reading of S δόλον (shared with B and corresponding to the MT), was changed by corrector ca to εὑρέθη δόλος (which is the reading of Q, A, and followed by Rahlfs, Ziegler, and 1 Peter). Hatch (1889, 4.202) considered the original reading to be οὐδὲ δόλος; Ottley suggested δόλον was altered to match ἀνομίαν, and that A was very early harmonized to the NT. But because εὑρέθη is found in both 1 Peter and Revelation, it is unlikely that this is an insertion, since both would have had to make the same insertion independently. 1 Pet 2:22 has ὃς ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ. Rev 14:5 has καὶ ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτῶν οὐχ εὑρέθη ψεῦδος.
10 Matt 20:28 and Mark 10:45 allude to giving one’s soul to benefit others. Both read ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθεν διακονηθῆναι ἀλλὰ διακονῆσαι καὶ δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν.
11 Paul alluded to the justification of the many in Rom 5:19: διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.
12 1 Pet 2:24 conflates 53:12 with 53:4: ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶναὐτὸςἀνήνεγκεν. That those who benefit from Jesus’ work are many is mentioned in Mark 14:24 (τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης τὸ ἐκχυννόμενον ὑπὲρ πολλῶν) and Rom 5:15, (ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ δωρεὰ ἐν χάριτι τῇ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐπερίσσευσεν). In 1 John 3:5, the taking away of sins is mentioned: ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη, ἵνα τὰςἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, καὶ ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν. In the New Testament, the “strong man” is mentioned in Matt 12:29 (ἢ πῶς δύναταί τις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ καὶ τὰ σκεύη αὐτοῦ ἁρπάσαι, ἐὰν μὴ πρῶτον
δήσῃ τὸνἰσχυρόν😉 and Luke 11:22 (ἐπὰν δὲ ἰσχυρότερος αὐτοῦ ἐπελθὼν νικήσῃ αὐτόν, τὴν πανοπλίαν αὐτοῦ αἴρει ἐφʼ ᾗ ἐπεποίθει καὶ τὰ σκῦλα αὐτοῦ διαδίδωσιν). According to Mark 15:27 and Matt 27:38, Jesus was among lawbreakers at his death, but in these two gospels the allusion is made without verbal borrowing, whereas Luke 22:37 (with MT) makes the connection to Isaiah explicit: τοῦτο τὸ γεγραμμένον δεῖ τελεσθῆναι ἐν ἐμοί, τό· καὶ μετὰ ἀνόμων ἐλογίσθη. Luke 23:34 mentions dividing his clothes: διαμεριζόμενοι δὲ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ ἔβαλον κλήρους. Paul drew on this scripture when in 1 Cor 15:3 he wrote that Christ died for our sins: Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς. The verbal parallel is even closer in Hebrews 9:28: ὁ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς εἰς τὸ πολλῶνἀνενεγκεῖν ἁμαρτίας. 1 Pet 2:24 has ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, ἵνα ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσωμεν, οὗ τῷ μώλωπι ἰάθητε.
1 The phrase στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα is in the vocative case. The aorist imperative ῥῆξον is from ῥήγνυμι, “break out.” The feminine participle ὠδίνουσα is from ὠδίνω, “have birth-pangs.” The adjective ἐρήμου here is feminine, and although this adjective normally describes land (a deserted land is a desert), here it refers to a deserted woman. In the verbless clause ὅτιπολλὰτὰτέκνατῆςἐρήμουμᾶλλον, the adverb μᾶλλονis displaced far from the πολλά that it modifies. Gal 4:27 cites this prophecy verbatim: Εὐφράνθητι, στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα, ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον, ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσα· ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα. Luke 23:29 alludes to the reversal of barrenness: ἔρχονται ἡμέραι ἐν αἷς ἐροῦσιν· μακάριαι αἱ στεῖραι καὶ αἱ κοιλίαι αἳ οὐκ ἐγέννησαν καὶ μαστοὶ οἳ οὐκ ἔθρεψαν.
2 The vocabulary recalls Exod 38:21. The imperative πλάτυνον is an aorist form πλατύνω, “broaden.” In the singular form, αὐλαία usually refers to a curtain, but in the plural it is used for screens; in Judith the singular is used for the place Bagoas knocked so as not to interrupt Holofernes inside the tent. The imperative πῆξον is an aorist form of πήγνυμι, “fix in place.” The μή preceding φείσῃ indicates this is not future indicative but aorist subjunctive of φείδομαι, “refrain;” however compare μνησθήσῃ in 54:4. The σχοινίσματα are allotments of land. A πάσσαλος is a peg; in the LXX this noun is used for the tabernacle, but LSJ also cites InscriptionesGraecae 14 #352 i 38 where it is used to mark boundaries.
3 Instead of ἔτι (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has ὅτι, supported only by 538 and MT כי. The form ἐκπέτασον is from ἐκπετάννυμι, “spread out.” The first-hands of both Q and S read the singular πόλις; this reading was changed by Q’s corrector and S corrector cb3 to the plural spelling πόλεις, which is what A and B have, followed by
Rahlfs and Ziegler; it is evidently just a spelling variation since the matching participle is plural; the Hebrew is also the plural ערים. The future κατοικιεῖς (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is from κατοικίζω (A has κατοικήσεις, from κατοικέω). The verb κατοικίζω is the causative form of κατοικέω, with an object that is sometimes personal and sometimes local. When local, it refers to settling and colonizing.
4 The form κατῃσχύνθης is the aorist passive of καταισχύνω, “disgrace,” and ἐντραπῇς is from ἐντρέπω, “defer.” The aorist passive ὠνειδίσθης is from ὀνειδίζω, and ἐπιλήσῃ is the future middle of ἐπιλανθάνομαι, “forget.” With the negator οὐ μή, a subjunctive might be expected in place of μνησθήσῃ, but instead we have the future indicative of μιμνῄσκομαι.
5 Instead of αὐτός ( the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured ἅγιος with the sole support of the MT. The subject of κληθήσεται is unclear in most manuscripts; Ottley took the earlier part of this verse as two verbless clauses, Brenton and Silva as three. The other option is to take Κύριος the subject, as Eusebius interpreted this section: “The Lord has not called you as a forsaken and faint-hearted woman” (Comm. Isa.2.43), evidently not reading a paragraph break in the middle of verse 6. He commented, “he who was once God of Israel alone is now known in all the earth” (2.43).
6 The form καταλελειμμένην is in Q spelled καταλελιμμένην, as in S and the first-hand of B (followed by Swete). Note the accusative form, corresponding to σε.
7 The past time of disfavour was short compared to the coming time of favour. The accusatives χρόνον μικρόν are used adverbially. Swete spelled μετά as μετʼ.
8 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding the reading ἠλέησά.
9 The dative τῇ γῇ could attach to either ὤμοσα or θυμωθήσεσθαι. The passive of θυμόω (as in the future infinitive θυμωθήσεσθαι) is commonly used for becoming angry, with the object of the anger in the dative. Future infinitives convey purpose. The future infinitive emphasizes that the time referred to is later than that of the main verb (Smyth 1956, sec. 1865.d) (also in the next verse). Ottley and Silva interpreted ἐπὶ σοὶ as the cause of the anger, Brenton as the object of the anger. An ἀπειλή is a threat. The phrase ἐν ἀπειλῇ σου was understood by Ottley and Silva as the purpose for moving the mountains (which in S are boundaries).
10 The reading μεταστήσασθαι (the reading also of S corrector cb3, A, and followed by Ziegler) was changed by Q’s corrector to μεταστήσεσθαι, the reading of B (followed by Rahlfs); the first-hand of S wrote μεταστήσασθε. Instead of οὐδέ (as spelled also by A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has οὐδʼ. The subjunctive μεταστῇ is an aorist of μεθίστημι, “remove.” Instead of Κύριος Ἵλεώς σοι (the reading also of S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has Ἵλεώς σοι, Κύριε. The adjective ἵλεως is masculine nominative, but indefinite, so it could modify Κύριος predicatively (rather than attributively). Ottley translated, “for he said, The Lord is gracious to thee.” Silva translated, “the Lord said he would be merciful to you.” The adjective Ἵλεώς is the Attic form of ἵλαος, and refers to a favourable disposition. The idiom Ἵλεώςσοιcarries an implicit ὁ θεὸς εἴη; it is a wish that God have mercy on you (Genesis 43:23), but see also (Joosten 2007). It is used in Matt16:12 in a context which in English might be expressed by “God forbid!”
11 The redundant pronoun ἐγώ provides emphasis to the subject. The verb ἑτοιμάζω has two accusatives; normally in such cases the more definite is the direct object, and the less definite is the complement, so “preparing your stone as a coal” and “your foundations as sapphire.” Eusebius confirmed this with his paraphrases, ἄνθρακαλίθον τίμιον ἑτοιμάσει αὐτῇ, and τὰ δὲ θεμέλιάσου ἀπὸ λίθου
σαπφείρου συνθήσω, since the preposition before the stone indicates that the foundations are the direct object. Rev 21:19 alludes to the foundations of precious stones, particularly lapis lazuli: οἱ θεμέλιοι τοῦ τείχους τῆς πόλεως παντὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ κεκοσμημένοι· ὁ θεμέλιος ὁ πρῶτος ἴασπις, ὁ δεύτερος σάπφιρος, ὁ τρίτος χαλκηδών, ὁ τέταρτος σμάραγδος.
11 The noun ἄνθραξ is used to refer to both charcoal and red precious stones such as rubies and carbuncles. Eusebius understood the former sense, connecting it with the coal used to purify the prophet’s lips in 6:6. σαπφείρος is lapis lazuli (see Exodus 24:10). Eusebius said this is the colour of the sky.
12 The stone ἴασπις is specifically jasper but can refer to any opaque precious stone (BDAG). The noun κρύσταλλος normally refers to ice or rock-crystal. Eusebius associated it with radiance and purity.
13 John 6:45 cites the expression πάντας τοὺς υἱούς σου διδακτοὺς θεοῦ as Καὶ ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ θεοῦ. The accusatives are objects of θήσω.
14 The second person verb οἰκοδομηθήσῃ is a future passive indicative. The imperative ἀπέχου is from ἀπέχω; the contextual sense here is to be distant. Tremors (τρόμος) often appear in parallel with φόβος. The form ἐγγιεῖ is a future of ἐγγίζω.
15 The noun προσήλυτοι translates the Hebrew noun גר, and the verb προσελεύσονταί translates the verb יגור. Philo Spec. 1, 51 also used this etymology: τούτους δὲ καλεῖ προσηλύτους ἀπὸ τοῦ προσεληλυθέναι καινῇ καὶ φιλοθέῳ πολιτείᾳ. The preposition ἐπί with καταφεύγω refers to that in which one takes refuge.
16 The reading κτίζω agrees with S, A, 965, and Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has ἔκτισα. MT has בראתי, so one would expect an aorist here. The verb φυσάω is used for blowing air. The prepositional phrase εἰς ἔργον indicates the vessel has a purpose, a job to do. Eusebius took φθεῖραι with what follows rather than with what precedes. Paul alluded to the vessels for destruction in Rom 9:22: εἰ δὲ θέλων ὁ θεὸς ἐνδείξασθαι τὴν ὀργὴν καὶ γνωρίσαι τὸ δυνατὸν αὐτοῦ ἤνεγκεν ἐν πολλῇ μακροθυμίᾳ σκεύη ὀργῆς κατηρτισμένα εἰςἀπώλειαν.17 Instead of εὐοδώσω “succeed” (with S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has εὐδοκήσω “be well pleased.” The noun ἔνοχος with the genitive is used for those subject to someone. Instead of αὐτῇ (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has λύπῃ, supported by only a few 10th-12th century manuscripts, the Syrohexaplaric marginalia, and Theodoret. The referent of this pronoun is unclear; it could be φωνή or κρίσις. Eusebius noted that this phrase is not in the Hebrew or other Greek translations. Brenton translated it “thereby,” implying the process of vanquishing. Ottley translated, “they that are subject to thee shall be therein.” The subject of ἐστιν could be the referent of αὐτῇ.An inheritance for Lord’s servants(54:17)[[@Bible:Isa 55:1-2]]
17 G primarily used the nouns δοῦλος or παῖς to translate עבד in Isaiah, but here used the participle θεραπεύουσιν.
1 The combination of πορεύω with ἐπί is not uncommon; it is used, for example, in Matt 22:9: πορεύεσθε οὖν ἐπὶ τὰς διεξόδους τῶν ὁδῶν. Where the first-hand of Q has the infinitive πορεύεσθαι (the reading also of S), Q’s corrector opted to erase the iota and overwrite the alpha with an epsilon for the imperative πορεύεσθε (the reading of A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The Hebrew preposition here is ל. The partitive genitive οἴνου indicates drinking some of the wine. The fat (στέαρ) is in the accusative case, whereas οἴνου was genitive; the Hebrew is חלב, “milk.” According to John 7:37, Jesus issued a similar invitation to the thirsty: ἐάν τις διψᾷ ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω. Also in Rev 3:18 we find God inviting people to buy from him: συμβουλεύω σοι ἀγοράσαι παρʼ ἐμοῦ χρυσίον πεπυρωμένον ἐκ πυρὸς ἵνα πλουτήσῃς. In Revelation 21:6, God again offers to give water to the thirsty: ἐγὼ τῷ διψῶντι δώσω ἐκ τῆς πηγῆς τοῦ ὕδατος τῆς ζωῆς δωρεάν, and the invitation is repeated in Rev 22:17: καὶ ὁ διψῶν ἐρχέσθω, ὁ θέλων λαβέτω ὕδωρ ζωῆς δωρεάν.
2 The noun μόχθος denotes exertion. The two clauses ἵνατίτιμᾶσθεἀργυρίουandτὸνμόχθονὑμῶνοὐκεἰςπλησμονήν are connected by καί, which is a coordinating rather than subordinating conjunction. The formal equivalent would be “Why do you value silver and your labour does not bring satisfaction?” Both clauses are part of a rhetorical question, which we would render in English with a subordinate clause instead of the coordinated clauses we see in Greek.
The verb ἐντρυφάω connotes self-indulgence. Note the singular noun ἡ ψυχὴ and plural pronoun ὑμῶν, which match the Hebrew נפשׁכם.
3 The reading ἐισακολουθήσατε was changed in S by corrector cb2 to ἐπακολουθήσατε “follow,” matching Q, A, and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
Nations will call upon you(55:3-5)[[@Bible:Isa 55:1-2]]
3 The pair διαθήσομαι … διαθήκην is cognate in Greek, but the Hebrew has ואכרת … ברית. In the phrase τὰὅσιαΔαυὶδτὰπιστά, the attributive adjective must be πιστά and the substantive must be ὅσια (rather than “the holy faithful things”), since this syntax matches the “article-substantive-article-adjective” order Porter called “Position 2” (Porter 1992, sec. 6.1.1). David is in the middle because that is the Hebrew word order. Acts 13:34 cites this prophecy as Δώσω ὑμῖντὰ ὅσια Δαυὶδ τὰ πιστά. Hebrews 13:20 mentions the eternal covenant: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν.
4 In Revelation 1:5 the witness who is a global ruler appears: καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός, ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς. Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ.
6 The exhortation to seek God while he may be found is made in Acts 17:27: ζητεῖν τὸν θεόν, εἰ ἄρα γε ψηλαφήσειαν αὐτὸνκαὶεὕροιεν, καί γε οὐ μακρὰν ἀπὸ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου ἡμῶν ὑπάρχοντα.
7 Forgiveness of sins is attributed to God alone in Luke 5:21: καὶ ἤρξαντο διαλογίζεσθαι οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι λέγοντες· τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὃς λαλεῖ βλασφημίας; τίς δύναται ἁμαρτίας ἀφεῖναι εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ θεός;
My ways are not like your ways(55:8-9)[[@Bible:Isa 55:6-9]]
9 The change in sound is slight between the pair “your” διανοήματα and “my” διανοίας, a fact that is obscured by translating the latter as “mind;” perhaps “thinking” would convey the cognate better.
10 2 Cor 9:10 (S) quotes Isa 55:10 as follows: ὁ δὲ ἐπιχορηγῶν σπέρμα τῷ σπείροντι καὶ ἄρτον εἰς βρῶσιν, although B has σπορον for σπέρμα.
12 Instead of διδαχθήσεσθε (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has διαχθήσεσθε, on the basis of only 22c-93, 377-564-565, 198, the Coptic, and Jerome. The participle προσδεχόμενοι presents the welcoming as a concurrent circumstance to the leaping (Porter 1992, sec. 10.4.1).
13 Instead of Κύριος (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has κυρίῳ, on the basis of only 62-90-130-311, 544, and Theodoret.
Blessed is the man who does these things(56:2)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
2 Both μακάριος and ἀνήρ are anarthous, in contrast to ὁ ποιῶν. The parallel noun ἄνθρωπος is likewise without the article. The Hebrew words are אנושׁ and אדם, respectively. The participle φυλάσσων recalls the Φυλάσσεσθε of the preceding verse. The first-hand of Q has the singular noun ἀδίκημα (the reading also of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); Q’s corrector opted for the plural adjective ἄδικα (the reading of B and 965).
Let the faithful stranger not fear separation(56:3)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
3 The verb πρόσκειμαι normally takes a dative, which is used for close attachment and devotion, specifically to God in Jos. Asen. 15.6 and Sib. Or. 3.574, so the dative Κυρίῳ (the reading of S) is the expected form with πρόσκειμαι; Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have πρὸς Κύριον instead. The preposition πρός matches the Hebrew אל. The form Ἀφοριεῖ is the future of ἀφορίζω, “separate.” Possibly the story of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:27 was intended to recall Isaiah 56:3-7.
Eunuchs will have an eternal legacy(56:4-5)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
4 Although τοῖς εὐνούχοις most likely indicates the addressees, alternatively it could be part of Lord’s speech, in which case αὐτοῖς (56:5) would have the same referent. The recurrence of φυλάξωνται recalls 56:1-2. The verb ἀντέχω with the genitive denotes holding a strong attachment.
5 The adjective ὀνομαστός indicates that the place will be well-known, i.e., famous. The Hebrew behind τόπον ὀνομαστόν is יד ושׁם. The sense is that although eunuchs do not have posterity to preserve their name, Lord will provide other ways for them to be remembered.
6 There is no new finite verb in this verse, so the dative continues the αὐτοῖς of 56:5. Ottley spelled ἀλλογενέσι as ἀλλογενέσιν. Swete spelled ἀγαπᾶν as ἀγαπᾷν. The recurrence of φυλασσομένους recalls 56:1, 2, and 4. There are three accusatives governed by the preposition εἰς: bondmen and bondwomen and sabbath-keepers; these three are what the God-fearing foreigners become.
7 The future of εὐφραίνω is used, with the accusative indicating the person cheered. The neuter τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα must be nominative, in parallel with αἱ θυσίαι. See Acts 10:35 for the connection with salvation and δεκταί, doing what is right. Paul mentioned the acceptable sacrifice in Phil 4:18: ἀπέχω δὲ πάντα καὶ περισσεύω· πεπλήρωμαι δεξάμενος παρὰ Ἐπαφροδίτου τὰ παρʼ ὑμῶν, ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, θυσίαν δεκτήν, εὐάρεστον τῷ θεῷ. The passive κληθήσεται hasthe nominative οἶκος as its subject. Mark 11:17 has the full quote Ὁοἶκόςμουοἶκοςπροσευχῆςκληθήσεταιπᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν; Matt 21:13 shortens it to Ὁοἶκόςμουοἶκοςπροσευχῆςκληθήσεται; Luke 19:46 (S) has the even shorter ὁοἶκόςμουοἶκοςπροσευχῆς. The point made in the context of Isaiah, namely that the house of prayer is πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, is lost in Matthew and Luke. Here the eunuchs and foreigners are accepted; in Luke 17:18 it is the leper that is the foreigner; in Acts 8:27 the eunuch.
8 The cognates συνάγων … συνάξω … συναγωγήν match the Hebrew words, which are all from the root קבץ. The use of the preposition ἐπί in συνάξωἐπʼ αὐτὸνσυναγωγήνis similar to that in Mark 5:21, where the crowd gethered “to” Jesus.This preposition is the regular translation of על, which in the Hebrew clearly has a singular pronoun. Eusebius did not comment on this unexpected preposition because he interpreted only the first half of the verse.
9 The neuter τὰ θηρία is probably vocative, but the beasts could be read as accusative. The adjective τὰἄγρια, “wild,” might seem redundant when describing τὰθηρία,“beasts.”
10 The adjective ἐνεός designates those unable to speak. The infinitive ὑλακτεῖν (ὑλακτέω) indicates the sound that dogs make, whether barking, snarling, or howling. The verb ἐνυπνιάζομαι refers to dreaming. The accusative κοίτην indicates the place in which the dreaming is taking place. The verb νυστάζω connotes idleness and inaction.
11 The adjective ἀναιδής usually refers to lack of shame, but Brenton and Ottley both translated it as insatiability, perhaps because ἀναιδής connotes lack of restraint and because of the parallel lack of πλησμονήν, “satiety.” The verb ἐξηκολούθησαν means to follow, especially by imitating behavior. The expression κατὰ τὸ αὐτό means “together,” as in Acts 14:1; 1 Kgdms 11:11.
1 Q, A, B, and 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐκδέχεται τῇ καρδίᾳ … κατανοεῖ; S has κατανοεῖ … ἐκδέχεται τῇ καρδίᾳ. In place of κατανοεῖ, S scribe B originally wrote κατανομει, which was changed by cb1 to κατανοεῖ τῇ καρδίᾳ, and by cb3 to κατανοεῖ.
3 James 4:4 too labels his addressees as adulterers: μοιχαλίδες, οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ἔχθρα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν; In 2 Thess 2:3 the son of destruction is mentioned in conjunction with lawlessness: ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας,
5 The combination ἀνὰμέσονfunctions as a preposition “between,” that takes a genitive object.
7 The participle ἀναβιβάσας was changed by corrector ca to the indicative ἀνεβίβασας, which is also the reading of Q, A, B and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler. The expression ὑψηλὸν καὶ μετέωρον appears also in 2:12-13; 30:25. The adjective μετέωρον is used for arrogance in 2:12; 5:15.
Your unfaithfulness alienated us(57:8-14)[[@Bible:Isa 57:1-2]]
8 The transitive sense of ἀφίστημι is to move something, but typically in a non-physical sense of getting people to defect.
10 LEH lists πολυοδίαas a neologism. There are several ways of interpreting the relationship of the participle ἐνισχύουσα to the finite verb παύσομαι:attendant circumstance (“pause and regain strength”) and purpose (“pause in order to regain strength”) are two of the most obvious. But παύω in the middle with a present participle is a special construction that means to stop doing the action of the participle, such as ἐπαύσατο λαλῶν (Luke 5:4), ἐπαυσάμην ἐρωτῶν (Acts 21:32), ἐπαύσαντο οἰκοδομοῦντες (Genesis 11:8). Because διὰτοῦτο is at the beginning of the clause, it is simpler to interpret it as a conjunction “therefore,” rather than a prepositional phrase “you did not entreat me because of this.”
11 Ottley, Swete, and Ziegler place σύ at the end of verse 10, and although Rahlfs puts it at the beginning of verse 11, his punctuation makes it part of the preceding sentence. Instead of κἀγώ (the spelling also of Ottley, Rahlfs, and Ziegler), S and B (Swete) spell it καὶ ἐγώ. The participle εὐλαβηθεῖσαexpresses a situation antecedent to the main action ἐφοβήθης(Porter 1992, sec. 10.4.1). The
participle ἰδὼνrelates the same way to παρορῶ, but in this case there is some opposition of meaning, which makes the participle concessive.
12 Again, Q, Ottley, Rahlfs, and Ziegler have κἀγώ.
13 Koenen noted that ἐν τῆ θλίψει σου indicates that G was translating בקציך rather than קבוציך (Koenen 1989).
15 Reminiscent of the crushed in heart are the poor in spirit mentioned in the beatitudes (Matt 5:3): Μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι, ὅτι αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. Paul advocated patience in the context of the discouraged, in 1 Thess 5:14: Παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτους, παραμυθεῖσθε τοὺς ὀλιγοψύχους, ἀντέχεσθε τῶν ἀσθενῶν, μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας. Paul’s speech in Acts 17:25 alludes to God as the giver of life and breath: οὐδὲ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων θεραπεύεται προσδεόμενός τινος, αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσιν ζωὴνκαὶ πνοὴν καὶ τὰ πάντα.
17 Ottley spelled διʼ as διά. The combination βραχύτιmeans “for some short [time/distance],” i.e., “a little bit” or “briefly.”It appears also in Ps 8:6 “he made him lower than the angels for/by a little bit;”2 Kingdoms 16:1 “a little while/distance.” By the time the reader reaches the nominative στυγνὸς, the subject has already changed from the first person ἀπέστρεψα to the third person ἐλυπήθη. So although “a gloomy person” could function substantively as the subject of ἐλυπήθη and ἐπορεύθη, more likely it is functioning attributively, describing the (already-established) agent of these verbs: “he went away gloomy.”
18 In place of ἑώρακα, Swete has ἑόρακα.
19 The accusatives εἰρήνηνἐπʼεἰρήνηνare objects of ἔδωκα from the preceding verse, along with παράκλησιν. Acts 2:39 mentions those distant who are comforted by God: ὑμῖν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἐπαγγελία καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν καὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς εἰς
20 Ephesians 4:14 mentions being tossed by waves: ἵνα μηκέτι ὦμεν νήπιοι, κλυδωνιζόμενοι καὶ περιφερόμενοι παντὶ ἀνέμῳ τῆς διδασκαλίας ἐν τῇ κυβείᾳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἐν πανουργίᾳ πρὸς τὴν μεθοδείαν τῆς πλάνης. The image is also used by Jude 13 but with no verbal parallels.
2 The expression ἡμέρανἐξἡμέρας appears in non-biblical Greek for things that happen every day, as for example, “Day by day you make your throw adventuring war against the Argives” in Euripides, Rhesus 445. In biblical Greek it appears first in Genesis 39:10 (Conybeare and Stock 1905, sec. 86c).
3 Matthew 9:14 raised the question of whether fasts are appropriate: Τότε προσέρχονται αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου λέγοντες· διὰ τί ἡμεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι νηστεύομεν πολλά, οἱ δὲ μαθηταί σου οὐ νηστεύουσιν; Both the first-hand of Q and S’s corrector cb3 have the third-person singular, middle/passive εὑρίσκεται; the most recent singular nouns which might be found are κρίσιν and θεῷ; while God might be found by those seeking him improperly, the behavior being addressed is more likely to provoke judgement. By fasting, the addressees sting both their wishes (food) and their subjects; by doing so, they find judgement. Q’s corrector, the first-hand of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the second-person plural, active εὑρίσκετε, having the people find their wishes and sting their subjects.
5 Matthew 6:16 describes some of the self-abasement associated with fasting, and the impropriety of fasts that are outward-only: Ὅταν δὲ νηστεύητε, μὴ γίνεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταὶ σκυθρωποί, ἀφανίζουσιν γὰρ τὰ πρόσωπα αὐτῶν ὅπως φανῶσιν
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις νηστεύοντες· ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. The expression καλέσετε νηστείαν δεκτήν may be alluded to in the addition to the quotation of Isaiah 61 in Luke 4:18-19, which has κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν.
6 The prepositional phrase ἐνἀφέσειmodifies not τεθραυσμένουςbut ἀπόστελλε. According to Luke 4:18, Jesus quoted this text after reading from Isaiah 61 in the synagogue: πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπʼ ἐμὲ οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέν με, κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει. Acts 8:23 refers to this fetter of injustice: εἰς γὰρ χολὴν πικρίας καὶ σύνδεσμονἀδικίας ὁρῶ σε ὄντα.
7 Matthew 25:35 alludes to the treatment of the deprived, specifically feeding the hungry and welcoming the stranger: ἐπείνασα γὰρ καὶ ἐδώκατέ μοι φαγεῖν, ἐδίψησα καὶ ἐποτίσατέ με, ξένος ἤμην καὶ συνηγάγετέ με.
8 Revelation 21:11 alludes to the shining of God’s glory: ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦθεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς ὅμοιος λίθῳ τιμιωτάτῳ ὡς λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι κρυσταλλίζοντι.
10 Matthew 4:16 alludes to the light rising in the darkness: ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐνσκότειφῶς εἶδεν μέγα, καὶ τοῖς καθημένοις ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς.
11 Instead of the second instance of ἔσται (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Ziegler), Rahlfs has ἔσῃ, supported by the Syrohexapla and Lucianic family, and Theodoret, matching MT. The promise of God’s presence is applied to Jesus in Acts 10:38: Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέθ, ὡς ἔχρισεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ δυνάμει, ὃς διῆλθεν εὐεργετῶν καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ. The referent of the feminine singular relative pronoun in πηγὴἣνμὴἐξέλιπενὕδωρ is clearly the spring, but because it is accusative, the subject must be ὕδωρ as a nominative. Normally ἐκλείπω does not take an object, but when it does, it denotes abandonment. Water has not abandoned this spring. Cook identified an intertextual connection with Prov 16:2 (Cook 2010). The spring that never lacks water is alluded to in John 4:14, where Jesus tells the Samaritan woman: ὃς δʼ ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, οὐ μὴ διψήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω αὐτῷ γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
12 The adjective αἰώνιοι is nominative because it describes the nominative deserts (αἱἔρημοι). Eusebius interpreted the foundations in light of Ephesians 2:20, where the foundations are the apostles and prophets.
13 The protasis of a third class conditional is provided by the clause beginning ἐὰνἀποστρέψῃς.
14 It is not clear where the protasis ends and the apodosis begins. Eusebius paraphrased with the turning and calling in the aorist subjunctive, and the lifting, speaking, and trusting in the future indicative, suggesting by the change of tense where the apodosis begins. Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the future indicative ἀναβιβάσειwhich yields better sense (“he will lift you”) thanthe aorist subjunctive ἀναβιβάσῃ (“he may lift you”) of S.
2 Where the Hebrew has the sins of the people obscuring God’s face(s) (וחטאותיכם הסתירו פנים מכם, “and your sins have hidden faces from you”), G has God turning his face because of the sins (“he has turned his face away from you … because of your sins”).
3 In the bloody hands, Eusebius (2.47) found reference to the Jewish people’s “uprising against the Savior and their scheme against righteous men,” since they asked for his blood to be on them and on their children (Matt 27:25).
4 In the vanities and empty words Eusebius found reference to Jewish myths expecting another human Christ.
5 Ottley and Swete spelled ᾠὰ and ᾠῶν as ὠὰ and ὠῶν. David Weissert argued that οὔριον is a translation of הזורה, solving the other discrepancies in the translation. This verse provides the origin of the idea that the basilisk is hatched from a rooster’s egg (Weissert 1967).
6 Although ἱστός can refer to the beam of a loom and also the product of weaving, Eusebius assumed it was the product of a spider (ἱστὸνἀράχνης) mentioned earlier. The article and possessive pronoun in ὁἱστὸςαὐτῶνconfirm that this is not something introduced for the first time; it is recalling the earlier web. According to Eusebius, this “web” is the set of traditions imposed by humans in Isa 29:13. The statement that their web will not become a garment means their intention will be foiled. Even though δέ is inserted between οὐ andμή, the construction here retains the emphatic force of the double-negated subjunctive.
7 The infinitive ἐκχέαιαἷμα complements the adjective ταχινοί, indicating what their feet are quick to do.
8 In place of οἴδασιν (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has ἔγνωσαν, following the reading of Romans 3:17.
Romans 3:15-18 cites this prophecy: ὀξεῖς οἱπόδες αὐτῶνἐκχέαι αἷμα, σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. οὐκ ἔστιν φόβος θεοῦ ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. Eusebius (2.47) implied that the destruction referred to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, by quoting Luke 19:42-44. He said judgement and righteousness departed from the Jews and went to the Gentiles because when their “peace” came they did not welcome him, quoting Eph 2:14 and John 1:11. The “way of peace” is mentioned in Luke 1:79: ἐπιφᾶναι τοῖς ἐν σκότει καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου καθημένοις, τοῦ κατευθῦναι τοὺς πόδας ἡμῶν εἰς ὁδὸνεἰρήνης.
9 The word αὐτῶν after ὑπομεινάντων is missing in the orginal hand of Codex Vaticanus; Ottley has ὑπομεινάντων <αὐτῶν>. The genitive absolute is rare in Isaiah.
10 The text of Q lacks the negator οὐχafter ὡς (thoughit is present in the margin).Because in S the word following the negator οὐχ is ὡς, the whole comparison is being negated. A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have ὡςοὐχ. The participle ὑπαρχόντωνagrees grammatically with the ὀφθαλμῶν (eyes), not with the blind or with the subject of the verb. The verb ὑπάρχω can indicate possession but in such cases the possessor is referred to in the dative case; rather the meaning is to be found in similar expressions Βαιθὴλ ἔσται ὡς οὐχ ὑπάρχουσα in Amos 5:5 (“Bethel will be as if she never existed”). Obadiah 16’s ἔσονται καθὼς οὐχ ὑπάρχοντες means it will be as if they never lived. In Haggai 2:3, the temple is καθὼς οὐχ ὑπάρχοντα ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν (“it seems to you as if it never existed”). In Sirach 44:9, ἀπώλοντο ὡς οὐχ ὑπάρξαντες appears alongside ἐγένοντο ὡς οὐ γεγονότες (as if they were not born). All these express the idea that something is so absent it is as if it never existed. In most manuscripts of Isa 59:10 it is as if the eyes never existed; in Q’s text, the eyes exist but the people still feel about. Still it is unclear why ὑπαρχόντωνὀφθαλμῶν is in the genitive case; it could be a genitive absolute, or a nominitive noun such as
ἄνθρωποι could be implied (“like people of existing eyes”). Ottley translated, “as though they had no eyes.” Eusebius made no comment that helps understand the grammar.
11 The expression Ἀνεμείναμεν κρίσιν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν recalls Isa 5:7 (ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι κρίσιν, ἐποίησεν δὲ ἀνομίαν), as well as Isa 59:9 (καὶοὐκἔστινκρίσιν θεοῦ ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν) and anticipates Isa 59:15 (ὅτι οὐκ ἦν κρίσις). Eusebius (2.47) said the “noon” is the “saving and evangelical sunlight” that shines on the church of God.
13 Holger Gzella argued that most of the so-called poʻel-forms (including Isa 59:13) are the result of textual difficulties, and those that are textually solid do not support a distinct meaning for the poʿel. Rather, these forms appear to have been created ad hoc when a derivative form was needed (Gzella 2010).
14 Instead of the negative ἠδύναντο (the reading also of S and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A and B both have the positive ἐδύναντο. Half of the instances of the verb ἀφίστημι in Isaiah occur in Isa 59:9-14. The intransitive meaning is to go or stay away from something expressed in the genitive case. The transitive meaning of ἀφίστημι is to cause such a separation (commonly by persuading people to revolt); the only transitive use in Isaiah occurs here. The first-hand of Q lacks both the final nu in αὐτῶν(creating the dative αὐτῷ) and the article before ἀλήθεια. Normally in Q, the position of αὐτῶ would take an overbar to indicate the dropped nu; an overbar may have been erased by Q’s corrector to create room to insert both the nu and the article.The conjunction ὅτιintroduces the cause of something, but it is unclear how far that cause extends. Certainly καταναλώθηἐνταῖςὁδοῖςαὐτῶνἡἀλήθεια(following the reading of Q’s corrector, as well as S, A, B, Rahlfs and Ziegler) is included, but it is possible that it continues withκαὶδιʼ εὐθείαςοὐκἠδύναντοδιελθεῖν. Eusebius’s treatment indicates that the cause continues through the coordinating conjunction καί.
15 The original scribe of S wrote συνιναι, matching the reading of A, a spelling variant of συνεῖναι, “be together”; it was changed by ca to συνιέναι “understand,” which is the reading also of Q, B (as συνειεναι), and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
16 The future participle conveys intention, so ὁἀντιλημψόμενος would signify someone willing to help. The only other future participles in Isaiah are at 1:31 (no one to extinguish) and 59:18. The expression οὐκἦνὁἀντιλημψόμενος indicates there was no person in a position to help.Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; however, it was Q’s corrector who deleted the mu from ἀντιλημψόμενος here in 59:16, as from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5.
17 Paul drew on the image of wearing a metaphorical breastplate (representing peace rather than righteousness) and salvation as a helmet in 1 Thess 5:8: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἡμέρας ὄντες νήφωμεν ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ περικεφαλαίαν ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας. Ephesians 6:14-17 makes the same two allusions, but matches Isaiah more closely, in that the breastplate represents righteousness: στῆτε οὖν περιζωσάμενοι τὴν ὀσφὺν ὑμῶν ἐν ἀληθείᾳ καὶ ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν θώρακα τῆς δικαιοσύνης and καὶ τὴν περικεφαλαίαν τοῦ σωτηρίου δέξασθε καὶ τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ.
18 Eusebius found fulfilment of Isa 59:18 in the Jews’ suffering in the final siege at the time of the Romans (2.48).
19 Luke 13:29 also uses the expressions “from the west,” and “from the east,” καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶνκαὶδυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. Eusebius (2.49) found fulfillment of the “west” and “east” in the calling of the Gentiles, of the Spirit of the Lord coming in the story of Pentecost (Acts 2:2-4), of the “sign for himself” in the ascension (John 15:26), of the spirit of the covenant in the bestowal of the spirit (John 20:22-23), and of the “light” in the message of the prophets to the people of Jerusalem.
21 The quotation continues in Romans 11:27 as καὶ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρʼ ἐμοῦ διαθήκη. Of the two nominatives, αὕτη and ἡδιαθήκη, the subject is the more
definite αὕτη, yielding the meaning “this is the covenant.” The dative αὐτοῖς then indicates who the covenant is for, and the prepositional phrase παρʼἐμοῦ indicates its source.
1 If Jesus was alluding to scripture in John 8:12 (ἐγώ εἰμι τὸφῶς τοῦ κόσμου· ὁ ἀκολουθῶν ἐμοὶ οὐ μὴ περιπατήσῃ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, ἀλλʼ ἕξει τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς), that scripture is probably Isa 60:1. Revelation 21:11 and 23 allude to God’s glory as a source of light for Jerusalem: 21:11 reads ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς ὅμοιος λίθῳ τιμιωτάτῳ ὡς λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι κρυσταλλίζοντι; Rev 21:23 reads καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ λύχνος αὐτῆς τὸ ἀρνίον. Eusebius wrote about “your light has come” as follows: “These things were partially but not entirely fulfilled at the first coming of our Savior, but they will come to pass completely at his second and glorious theophany” (2.49). He claimed that “arise” predicts the general resurrection (1 Thess 4:16). He found two commands for two different peoples at different times: “shine” is for the Jewish people, and “walk by your light” is for the church of the Gentiles.
4 The translation “gathered together,” translates a participle συνηγμένα, not a finite verb, so the meaning is not “your children did gather together,” but “your children who have been gathered together.”
6 Matthew 2:11 mentions gold and frankincense as two of the gifts the foreigners bring. Instead of Saba, Eusebius’ text had Basan; in his view, those from Basan are “those in the church who are well off.” He speculated, “perhaps all these things would not have been literally fulfilled among them, if they had received our Savior and Lord Jesus Christ.”
7 Matthew 21:13 mentions “my house” as “a house of prayer: γέγραπται· ὁοἶκόςμου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται, but that is more closely a combination of Isaiah 56:7 with Jeremiah 7:11.
12 The relative pronoun οἵτινες adds a sense of indefiniteness, which might be conveyed in English with “whatever nations and kings will not serve you.” Although the pronoun is masculine and therefore agrees grammatically with the kings, the masculine could incorporate the (neuter) nations as well. Eusebius interpreted the “strangers” as the leaders of the church who defend the church
doctrines (2.49). The “kings” are the “rulers of the Roman legions,” except the kings that do not serve you are the kings of nations that died in idolatry (2.50). The “gates” are the teachers of doctrine. Evidently he was celebrating the baptism of Constantine.
13 Eusebius interpreted the cedars as the educated leaders of the church (2.50), since the holy place is the church.
14 Revelation 3:9 echoes the reversal in which those that humbled the addressees will themselves be humbled, from Isa 60:14: ἰδοὺ διδῶ ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τοῦ σατανᾶ τῶν λεγόντων ἑαυτοὺς Ἰουδαίους εἶναι, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀλλὰ ψεύδονται. ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἠγάπησά σε.
16 According to Eusebius, the “wealth of kings” consists of the gifts (including sacred spaces) from rulers to the church, apparently referring to Constantine.
18 Behind γλύμμα “engraving” is the Hebrew תהלה. According to Schleusner, תהלה(“praise”) was translated ἀγαλλίαμα here as in 61:11, which was corrupted by later scribes to γλύμμα. Eusebius knew the reading as γλύμμα but preferred to interpret the meaning on the basis of Aquila (ὕμνησις, “hymn”) and Symmachus (αἴνεσις, “praise”) (2.50).
19 The glory of God provides the light also in Rev 21:11 (ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς), Rev 21:23 (καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν), and Rev 22:5 (καὶ νὺξ οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσιν χρείαν φωτὸς λύχνου καὶ φωτὸς ἡλίου, ὅτι κύριοςὁθεὸςφωτίσει ἐπʼ αὐτούς).
21 The noun φύτευμαindicates not the actof planting but the result of the planting action, i.e., something planted.
Lord anointed me with his spirit to proclaim good news(61:1-7)[[@Bible:Isa 61:1-3]]
1-3 Although the theme of the prophetic message continues from chapter 60, the change of grammatical person to first person signals a new prophecy. This cannot be the same speaker as in the end of chapter 60 because there Lord was speaking and here Lord is mentioned in the third person. This new prophecy continues at least through 61:4, speaking of the oppressed in the third person. 61:5 switches to second person, but God is still third person. Then 61:7 reverts to the third person for the people, and first person for God. Isaiah 61:3, 7, 10, and 11 are thematically linked by joy, also mentioned in 60:15; 62:5. The vocabulary of glory links 61:3 with what precedes and follows.
1 The prophecy expresses the speaker’s commission, in three parts: the presence of Lord’s spirit, Lord’s anointing, and the purpose of the anointing. The preposition εἵνεκεν takes a genitive that indicates the cause or reason. This case means the spirit on the speaker is the cause for the anointing, which is the reverse of what one would expect, since normally anointing results in the gift of the spirit. On the accent κηρύξαι see BDF §13; Swete, Ottley, Ziegler accent it as κηρῦξαι. LEH notes ἀνάβλεψις as a neologism; Tobit 14:2 has the corresponding verb in the sense of recovery of sight, but usually it refers to looking up, as used as early as Aristotle Physica 247b8. Nestle-Aland lists Matt 5:3; 11:5; Luke 6:20, 7:22; Acts 4:27, 10:38; Rev 5:10 as quotations of and allusions to Isa 61:1. Of these, Matt 5:3; Luke 6:20; and Rev 5:10 are not quotations or allusions. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται. The parallel Luke 7:22 reads, τυφλοὶἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται. Acts 4:27 has a possible allusion in συνήχθησαν γὰρ ἐπʼ ἀληθείας ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ ἐπὶ τὸν ἅγιον παῖδά σου Ἰησοῦν ὃν ἔχρισας, Ἡρῴδης τε καὶ Πόντιος Πιλᾶτος σὺν ἔθνεσιν καὶ λαοῖς Ἰσραήλ. Similarly, the allusion in Acts 10:38 is to the anointing: Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέθ, ὡς ἔχρισεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ δυνάμει, ὃς διῆλθεν εὐεργετῶν καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ. But the clearest reference to Isa 61:1 is a citation in Luke 4:18-19. The wording there is πνεῦμακυρίουἐπʼ ἐμὲοὗεἵνεκενἔχρισένμεεὐαγγελίσασθαιπτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκένμεκηρύξαι
2 Luke 4:19 quotes Isaiah 61:2. A series of infinitives describes the content of the commission: to bring good news, to heal, to proclaim, to call, to encourage, and finally, in 61:3, to be given. Whereas most of the infinitives are active verbs of speaking, this last infinitive δοθῆναιdoes not fit the pattern. Rather, it is better interpreted as the content of one of the things said by the prophet. The infinitive is one Greek way of expressing indirect discourse (Porter 1992, sec. 11.1.2.2), much like English “I claim to be” means the same as “I claim that I am.” The prophet is proclaiming that glory will be given to the downcast; glory, oil, and clothing. The previous infinitive παρακαλέσαιcannot be interpreted similarly because it is active, so two accusatives (one the agent, and one the patient) would need to be present in the clause. Isa 61:2-3 is also alluded to in Matt 5:4 and Luke 6:21. Matt 5:4 reads, μακάριοι οἱ πενθοῦντες, ὅτι αὐτοὶ παρακληθήσονται. The connection with Luke 6:21 is not verbal but thematic: μακάριοι οἱ πεινῶντες νῦν, ὅτι χορτασθήσεσθε. μακάριοι οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν, ὅτι γελάσετε.
3 For the second τοῖς πενθοῦσιν (although this is the reading of Q, S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs) Ziegler has ἀντὶ πένθους by conjecture, on the basis of the Syropalestinian translation, and the MT, explaining τοῖς πενθοῦσιν as a repetition from earlier in this verse.
3 The subject of the third person plural verbs would most naturally be those who mourn, mentioned in 61:2-3. Here they are prophesied to acquire a righteous name, and rebuild eternal cities. φύτευμα, a thing that is planted, recalls 60:21, φυλάσσων τὸ φύτευμα.
4 Q and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐξηρημωμένας twice in 61:4; in the first instance, A instead wrote ἐξῃρημένας; S wrote ἐξῃρημένας instead of the second ἐξηρημωμένας. The change of A and S makes the participle indicate what will happen after rather than before the restoration. Instead of raising up cities that had been abandoned, A has them raising up those that had been rescued, since the passive of ἐξαιρέω conveys removal, often from danger, as in Gen 37:21 or Eccl 7:26; rather than renewing cities that had been deserted, S has them renewing cities that will now be eternal.
5 In this future time of restoration, the prosperity will be of such an extent that the people of God will not have to perform manual labour. Instead, such work will be performed by foreigners, while those who serve Lord will be able to devote themselves to divine service. The present participle ποιμαίνοντες modifies the main verb ἥξουσιν. Normally present participles convey simultaneous action; they indicate what is happening while the action of the main verb takes place. That would mean the foreigners are tending the sheep as they are travelling; so reads Silva’s translation. But the context favors an interpretation that the foreigners come in order to tend the sheep. Classical Greek would use a future participle ποιμανοῦντες for such a purpose.
6 Rev 1:6 and 5:10 allude to Isa 61:6; they draw a connection between serving as God’s priest and ruling the world. Rev 1:6 reads, καὶ ἐποίησεν ἡμᾶς βασιλείαν, ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ. Rev 5:10 reads, καὶ ἐποίησας αὐτοὺς τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν βασιλείαν καὶ ἱερεῖς, καὶ βασιλεύσουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. Such will be the status of the addressees of this prophecy.
7 The pronouns shift to the third person in 61:7, where now “they” are to reinherit the land taken from them. ὑπέρ with the genitive normally is used to convey interest or benefit, although it can be used in a locative sense, as in Deut 28:23: καὶ ἔσται σοι ὁ οὐρανὸς ὁ ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς σου χαλκοῦς. Such is the sense of ὑπέρ κεφαλῆς (61:7). ὑπέρ is never used for resting on top of something, so the joy is higher than but not touching their heads.
8 The reason for the joy above their head is introduced by γάρ.It is because of Lord’s character: he loves righteousness and hates injustice. The implication is that the injustice that Lord’s people had suffered is being punished, and perhaps also their righteousness is being rewarded. The phraseἐγώεἰμιΚύριοςtranslates אנייהוה. μόχθοςis hard labour, translating פעלתם, “their work.”Ottley suggested this might mean not their toil but their reward for work, citing other examples of wages and reward that use work vocabulary in Isa 40:10; 49:4; 62:11, and mentioning also 45:14; 55:2; 65:7.These explain the meaning of the Hebrew, but not the choice of the Greek word. In G, as well as the rest of the OG, פְּעֻלָּה is usually translated ἔργον, andμόχθοςis usually fromעָמָל in OG. The only other instance of μόχθος in G translates יְגִיעַ in 55:2. Ziegler’s reading
δικαίως for δικαίοις is supported only by the 11th-century manuscript 544 and MT. Silva translates Ziegler’s reading as “I will give them their hard word righteously.” Heb 13:20 alludes to the eternal covenant of Isa 61:8 as follows: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν. Those who reinherit the land will be famous throughout the world, as a people God has blessed.
10 Susan Stephens (1985) described papyrus Yale 88, which includes Isa 61:10-11. Following the Hebrew, the verbs shift to the first person, but the theme of joy continues. Luke 1:47 has the verbal allusion καὶ ἠγαλλίασεν τὸ πνεῦμά μουἐπὶτῷ θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρί μου. The joy is symbolized by wedding clothes. It is these clothes that are alluded to in Rev 19:8: καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτῇ ἵνα περιβάληται βύσσινον λαμπρὸν καθαρόν· τὸ γὰρ βύσσινον τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἁγίων ἐστίν. The author of Revelation makes the connection more explicit with the verbal parallel in Rev 21:2, which also mentions a renewed city (61:4): καὶ τὴν πόλιν τὴν ἁγίαν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καινὴν εἶδον καταβαίνουσαν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡτοιμασμένην ὡςνύμφηνκεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς.
11 A botanical simile is used to convey the natural outcome of Lord’s character: he produces righteousness and joy as inevitably as plants produce flowers and seeds, and this outcome will be evident to all.
1 The beginning of chapter 62 is connected to what precedes by the themes of righteousness and salvation. The speaker on one hand will not be silent (οὐ σιωπήσομαι), and on the other hand will not raise (οὐκ ἀνήσω) his voice. Q and the other uncials (A, B, and S corrector ca, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the future σιωπήσομαι where the original scribe of S and S corrector cb3 have the subjunctive σιωπήσωμαι. The discrepancy is not surprising; the omicron and omega were not readily distinguishable by ear. What is surprising is that corrector cb3 considered this difference worth correcting to a reading not extant in other ancient witnesses. This pattern indicates that cb3 was simply reinforcing faded lettering, without reference to another manuscript.
2 In 62:1 the righteousness and salvation are the property of the speaker, but in 62:2 the righteousness and glory are the property of the addressee, and the Lord (notably with the article) is referred to in the third person. The message is the righteousness will be so manifest in Jerusalem as to attract the attention of other nations.
Isaiah 62:2 is alluded to in Rev 2:17 and 19:12, with the mention of a new name in Rev 2:17. In Revelation it is written name that no one else knows (καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ ψῆφον λευκήν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ψῆφον ὄνομα καινὸν γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ ὁ λαμβάνων). There is a subsequent reference to the secret written name in Rev 19:12 (ἔχων ὄνομα γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ αὐτός).
6 The present participle μιμνῃσκόμενοι is contemporaneous with σιωπήσονται, so that the acts of remembering are vocal. The allusion to 62:6 in Rev 21:12 identifies the φύλακας on the walls as ἀγγέλους on the gates, and continues the theme of written names. It reads ἔχουσα τεῖχος μέγα καὶ ὑψηλόν, ἔχουσα πυλῶνας δώδεκα καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς πυλῶσιν ἀγγέλους δώδεκα καὶ ὀνόματα ἐπιγεγραμμένα, ἅ ἐστιν [τὰ ὀνόματα] τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ.
7 In 62:6 the second person pronouns were singular; in 62:7 we find the plural ὑμῖν. Therefore the morphologically ambiguous διορθώσῃ and ποιήσῃ, which could be third person singular active subjunctive or second person singular middle (indicative or subjunctive), more naturally should be read as third person forms, as Ottley and Silva did. LEH notes that ἀγαυρίαμα is a neologism, but Eusebius made no comment on this vocabulary that might help us make sense of what it could mean for Jerusalem to become “boastfulness.” He implied only that Jerusalem’s transformation into ἀγαυρίαμα is part of God’s promise.
8 The combination of ὄμνυμι or ὀμνύωwith εἰ is an instance of aposiopesis, breaking off the apodosis in the context of a curse. The resulting meaning is a negative promise, as in Psalm 94:11’s εἰ εἰσελεύσονται, a phrase made famous by its quotation in Hebrews 3:11; 4:3, 5, “they shall certainly not enter.” The choice ofRahlfs and Ziegler to read δεξιᾶς αὐτοῦ rather than δόξης αὐτοῦ is supported only by a corrector of B, V, Jerome, and the MT.
9 The prophecy promises that the oppression whereby the agricultural producers in the past had the fruit of their labours taken from them (whether in war or in taxation is not specified) is about to be undone. Henceforth, Lord swears, workers will enjoy their own produce.
10-12 The theme of manifest salvation continues, with the mention of σωτήρin 62:11 and the signal for the nations in 62:10. So too does the symbolism of names; in this case, the city is renamed, indicating the reversal of its former plight: from forsaken to desirable.
10 Instead of the expected imperative,πορεύεσθε (the reading of Q’s corrector, the first-hand of S, A, and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the first-hand of Q and S corrector cb3 have the infinitive, πορεύεσθαι.The double presence of the article in S and A (Rahlfs) reading τοὺς λίθους τοὺς ἐκ τῆς ὁδοῦ makes the prepositional phrase limit the noun (stones) rather than the verb (throw) as in Q, B, S corrector cb2 (Ziegler). The use of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἔθνη rather than ἐν indicates that the message the signal conveys is directed toward the nations, and the signal does not come from the nations.
11 The participle ἔχων indicates that when the savior appears (παραγέγονεν) he has the reward with him. Remarkably (because cb2 usually makes changes
in the opposite direction), corrector cb2 changed the reading of A (παραγίνεται), to the reading of B (and Q), παραγέγονεν. Matt 21:5 quotes from Isa 62:11, but only the first four words of this composite quotation are from Isaiah; the remainder are from Zech 9:9. Matt 21:5 reads εἴπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὄνον καὶ ἐπὶ πῶλον υἱὸν ὑποζυγίου. Zech 9:9 has Χαῖρε σφόδρα, θύγατερ Σιων· κήρυσσε, θύγατερ Ιερουσαλημ· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι, δίκαιος καὶ σῴζων αὐτός, πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον.
1 The dative βίᾳ indicates the manner in which the arrival takes place(Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.5.3); it is not in apposition to στολῇ or otherwise governed by the preposition ἐν.
2 The neuter plurals ἐρυθρὰτὰἱμάτια are nominative, since this is a verbless clause. The first-hand of Q initirally wroteἐρυθὰ, before inserting a superscripted rho (ἐρυθρὰ) to fix the error.The red clothing is alluded to in Rev 19:13: καὶ περιβεβλημένος ἱμάτιον βεβαμμένον αἵματι, καὶ κέκληται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ. The image of the winepress trodden in wrath is used in Rev 14:19: καὶ ἔβαλεν ὁ ἄγγελος τὸ δρέπανον αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν γῆν καὶ ἐτρύγησεν τὴν ἄμπελον τῆς γῆς καὶ ἔβαλεν εἰς τὴν ληνὸν τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν μέγαν and again in Rev 19:15: καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ ἐκπορεύεται ῥομφαία ὀξεῖα, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῇ πατάξῃ τὰ ἔθνη, καὶ αὐτὸς ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ, καὶ αὐτὸς πατεῖ τὴν ληνὸν τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ παντοκράτορος.
3 Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the nominative πλήρης, which agrees grammatically with nothing and therefore must be part of a separate clause from what
precedes; the reader must supply a subject, such as “I am full of what has been trodden.” S instead has the genitive πλήρους, which agrees with thewinepress. The participle καταπεπατημένης is also genitive, and because ληνόςis feminine it could describe the winepress. Alternatively, because πλήρηςis typically followed by a genitive of the filling substance, the genitive could indicate what the winepress is full of: what has been trodden. In this case the trodden thing is feminine, which could be the earth/land, as in Rev 14:19.
3 LEH notes that καταθλάωis a neologism.
4 Ottley suggested G read בא להם (ἐπῆλθεν αὐτοῖς) instead of בלבי “in my heart.”
6 G read שׁבר, “shatter” instead of שׁכר, “make drunk.”
8 Instead of the subjunctive ἀθετήσωσιν of Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the future ἀθετήσουσιν. The οὐχ followed by another negative οὐμή is hard to interpret. Eusebius explained that God honours his people by calling them his children, if they do not reject his grace (2.54).
10 The preposition εἰς indicates the result of the turning; the new situation is enmity against them. Acts 7:51 is probably referring to this statement of provoking the holy spirit: Σκληροτράχηλοι καὶ ἀπερίτμητοι καρδίαις καὶ τοῖς ὠσίν, ὑμεῖς ἀεὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ ἀντιπίπτετε ὡς οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν καὶ ὑμεῖς. Ephesians 4:30 mentions grieving God’s holy spirit: καὶ μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸπνεῦματὸἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως.
11 The reading of S (γῆς) agrees with A but is not mentioned by Ziegler; B has τῆς θαλάσσης, agreeing with MT; Q (Rahlfs and Ziegler) has τῆς γῆς. Here B has a hexaplaric reading. Hebrews 13:20 alludes to the rasing of the shepherd of the sheep, but changes the word for “Bring” from ἀναβιβάσας to ἀναγαγών and changes the “earth” to the “dead”: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁἀναγαγὼν ἐκνεκρῶν τὸνποιμένατῶνπροβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν.
12 Instead of κατίσχυσεν (the reading also of S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured κατέσχισεν, on the basis of the MT alone.
13 Instead of διʼ ἐρήμου, Ziegler spelled it διὰ ἐρήμου.
15 Instead of ἴδε, Q’s accenter (Rahlfs) used the Attic accentuation ἰδὲ (see BDAG ἴδε and εἶδον). The reading of S (οἰκτιρμοί) was changed by ca to οἱ οἰκτιρμοί, and by cb2 to τῶν οἰκτειρμῶν, matching Q and A (B has anarthrous οἰκτειρμῶν, and Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν). The words ἔλεος and οἰκτιρμός overlap semantically. Both refer to expressions of concern for another’s misfortune. Typically ἔλεος is used for חֶסֶד and οἰκτιρμός is used for רַחֲמִים, but here the word behind ἔλεος is מֵעֶה.
16 The notion of calling God “Father,” and mention of his name both appear in the prayer Jesus taught in Matt 6:9, Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς· Πάτερἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ἁγιασθήτω τὸὄνομάσου. Later in the same prayer is the request ῥῦσαιἡμᾶς. God as Father appears also in John 8:41 (ἕνα πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν θεόν) and in James 3:9 (εὐλογοῦμεν τὸν κύριον καὶ πατέρα).
17 Q and the first-hand of S lack ἀπό after Κύριε; S corrector ca added it, in agreement with A and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The reading of S (τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν), which agrees
18 The scribes of both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus appear to have suffered from parablepsis; his eye skipped from one σου to the next, omitting οἱ ὑπεναντίοι ἡμῶν κατεπάτησαν τὸ ἁγίασμά σου, which the other manuscripts Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have.
1 (Rahlfs 63:19) Rahlfs puts the words ἐὰν ἀνοίξῃς τὸν οὐρανόν, τρόμος λήμψεται ἀπὸ σοῦ ὄρη, καὶ τακήσονται in 63:19, with MT; Swete, Ottley, and Ziegler put them in their own verse, 64:1, increasing the verse numbering in chapter 64 relative to the MT. Q has punctuation, a line break, and an overbar before these words, so my numbering follows that of Swete, Ottley, and Ziegler. The preposition ἀπό here and in verse 3 indicates the cause of the trembling; we could say the mountains will tremble “at” you.
2 (Rahlfs 1) The form τήκεται could be middle (“melts”) or passive (“is melted”).G read המסים as if from מסם “melt,” and κηρός might be a guess for קדח according to its phonological similarity if read as קרה. Instead of בעה G read בער, “burn.”
3 (Rahlfs 2) As in verse 1, ἀπό indicates the cause of the trembling.
5 (Rahlfs 4) Ottley suggested that instead of נושע, G read נפשע, but according to Blank (1952), G did not translate the (difficult) Hebrew בהם עולם ונושׁע; rather G substituted a similar thought from 63:17, accusing Lord of misleading them: Τί ἐπλάνησας ἡμᾶς, Κύριε, τῆς ὁδοῦ σου, ἐσκλήρυνας τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν τοῦ μὴ φοβεῖσθαί σε;
6 (Rahlfs 5) Q, S, A (Ottley), and B* (Swete) spelled ἐξερρύημεν as ἐξερύημεν.
Look upon your people, Lord(64:8-12)[[@Bible:Isa 64:5-12]]
9 (Rahlfs 8) Instead of לעד, “forever,” G read לעת, “at the time.”
10 (Rahlfs 9) Ottley and Swete placed the words εἰς κατάραν in the sentence preceding; Rahlfs and Ziegler in the sentence following. I follow Ottley and Swete because the punctuation in Q occurs before these words.
11 (Rahlfs 10) The spelling of Q’s first-hand, ηὐλόγησαν agrees with A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); it was later corrected to εὐλόγησαν, which agrees with S and B.
12 (Rahlfs 11) The middle voice of ἀνέχω refers to withstanding something difficult, as in 2 Thess 1:4; 1 Cor 4:12. Normally when this verb is used transitively, the thing withstood appears in the genitive case (Isa 46:4), but sometimes in the accusative (Isa 1:13). When used intransitively, the verb refers to self-restraint, as in Isa 42:14. Such is the usage here, with ἐπί indicating what potentially might have caused provocation but did not do so because of the self-restraint.
Natalio Fernández Marcos showed that the textual variants in Isaiah 65-66 attest a pattern of readings in manuscripts Ziegler called “Lucianic.” In these manuscripts he identified 13 small changes taken from the Three toward
conformity with the Masoretic Text, but even more stylistic improvements and a few Atticizing tendencies. He then pointed out a few older readings preserved in Antiochene manuscrpts, readings that were supplanted in later manuscripts Finally, he noted the Antiochene reading was an exegetical method that emphasised the historical over the allegorical method of interpretation, but he did not associate this method with specific Antiochene textual readings. In other words, the label “Antiochene reading” does not constitute a witness to Antiochene theology in the same way as Seeligmann claimed the Old Greek was a witness to Alexandrian theology (Fernández Marcos 2010).
1 Rom 10:20 cites Isa 65:1 as εὑρέθηντοῖςἐμὲμὴζητοῦσιν, ἐμφανὴςἐγενόμηντοῖςἐμὲμὴἐπερωτῶσιν, with transposed participles, like B. The verb ἐπερωτάω when it has deity as its object, can refer to inquiring after that deity (BDAG s.v. 1.c).
I stretched out my hands to a resistant people(65:2)[[@Bible:Isa 65:1-2]]
2 Paul continued the citation in Rom 10:21: ὅλην τὴν ἡμέρανἐξεπέτασα τὰς χεῖράς μουπρὸς λαὸν ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα, with one transposed phrase: the adverbial temporal clause is in a different position. Q has punctuation between ἀντιλέγοντα andτοῖςπορευομένοις, so the dative is the object not of the participle ἀντιλέγοντα but of the earlier indicative ἐξεπέτασα. Typically, ἀντιλέγω is transitive, with the dative indicating what is being opposed. The intransitive use of ἀντιλέγω appears also in Isa 22:22 and 50:5.
4 Matt 8:28 and Mark 5:3 use the same word for tombs: ὑπήντησαν αὐτῷ δύο δαιμονιζόμενοι ἐκ τῶν μνημείων ἐξερχόμενοι and ὃς τὴν κατοίκησιν εἶχεν ἐντοῖςμνήμασιν respectively. Instead of διʼ (the spelling also of A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has the spelling διά. Instead of κρέα ὕεια (the reading of S, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the original hand of Q wrote κρέα ὕιον; Q’s corrector opted for the reading of B, κρέας ὕειον. A has a variant spelling κρέα ὕια. Although a perfect participle rather than an adjective is used to indicate the vessels are defiled, the emphasis is not on the past action but on the present state. This is typical for μολύνω, as in Isa 59:3.
5 Instead of the Hebrew second person pronouns on קרב אליך (Πόρρω ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ) and קדשׁתיך (καθαρός εἰμι) G has first person forms. The words ἐν αὐτῷ have no counterpart in the Hebrew.
6 Instead of the active σιωπήσω (the reading also of S and B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has the middle σιωπήσομαι. Whereas A and B have either the subjunctive ἀποδῶ or the future ἀποδώσω, S has both ἀποδῶ καὶ ἀνταποδώσω, adding a slightly different future verb, which matches the Hebrew better (שלמתי ושלמתי). Codex Marchalianus (Q) includes ἀποδῶ καὶ ἀνταποδώσω with an asterisk between ἀποδῶ and καί.
8 Instead of the οὕτως of manuscripts Q, A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S spells it οὕτω.
9 The article τόbefore the proposition ἐξindicates that the prepositional phrases “from Jacob” and “from Judah” modify not the verb (bringing from Jacob) but the noun (the seed that is from Jacob). The repeated neuter singular article before the preposition τὸἐξἸούδα implies “seed” again.
11 The spelling of ἐγκαταλιπόντες is attested in Q and B )followed by Rahlfs); S has ενκαταλιποντες; A (Ottley) and Ziegler spelled it ἐγκαταλείποντές. Paul alluded to the table prepared for demons in 1 Cor 10:21: οὐ δύνασθε ποτήριον κυρίου πίνειν καὶ ποτήριον δαιμονίων, οὐ δύνασθε τραπέζης κυρίου μετέχειν καὶ τραπέζης δαιμονίων.
13 The verb διψήσεσθε is spelled διψήσεσθαι in S as in A; it was changed by S corrector cb3 to διψήσεται, a homophone of διψήσετε, which is what Q and B (Rahlfs, Ziegler) have. The nominative plural second person pronoun requires the second person indicative forms. Luke 6:25 also predicts a reversal in which those currently in power will experience hunger: οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, οἱ ἐμπεπλησμένοι νῦν, ὅτι πεινάσετε.
14 Where the MT has prepositional phrase מטוב לב, indicating that the cause of the shout is goodness of heart, G has ἐν εὐφροσύνῃ, and G’s preposition matches that of 1QIsaa ב טוב לב.
15 The dative τοῖςἐκλεκτοῖςμου indicates the recipients of the gratification: “my chosen people.” Revelation alludes to the new name given to the chosen people, possible playing on the similarity of the words ἐκκλησίαις and ἐκλεκτοῖς. Rev 2:17 reads, Ὁ ἔχων οὖς ἀκουσάτω τί τὸ πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις. Τῷ νικῶντι δώσω αὐτῷ τοῦ μάννα τοῦ κεκρυμμένου καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ ψῆφον λευκήν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ψῆφον ὄνομα καινὸν γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ ὁ λαμβάνων. Q has a large space between μοι and κληθήσεται.
They, not others, will enjoy their produce(65:15-22)[[@Bible:Isa 65:13-16]]
16 The adjective ἀληθινός is applied to Jesus in Rev 3:14: Τάδε λέγει ὁ ἀμήν, ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστὸς καὶ ἀληθινός, ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ. Q’s scribe initially wrote ἐπιλήψονται (Q frequently omits the mu in futures of –λαμβάνω) before catching his own mistake; he erased the psi and wrote a sigma instead, to give ἐπιλήσονται (from ἐπιλανθάνομαι), matching the reading of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
17 The expression ἔσταιγὰρὁοὐρανὸςκαινὸςκαὶἡγῆκαινή might alternatively be translated, “For there will be the new sky and the new earth.” Second Peter 3:13 alludes to this new sky and earth: καινοὺς δὲ οὐρανοὺς καὶκαινὴν γῆν, as does Rev 21:1: Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶγῆν καινήν: ὁ γὰρ πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ ἀπῆλθαν.
18 The two words εὐφροσύνηand ἀγαλλίαμα are near synonyms. Typically, the semantic range of Greek εὐφροσύνη has to do with festivity (merry-making), and ἀγαλλιάωwith rejoicing, and In Isaiah the semantic range of εὐφροσύνη is likewise more active, overlapping with English celebration, whereas ἀγαλλίαμα is more audible, overlapping with shouts of joy. Probably because of the similarity in sound, the Hebrew גיל tends to be translated as ἀγαλλίαμα, and behind the more common εὐφροσύνηwe tend to find the roots רנן, שׂמח, and שׂושׂ.Luke 6:21 also describes a reversal of mourning into rejoicing, but with differing vocabulary: μακάριοι οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν, ὅτι γελάσετε.
Instead of יָמוּת, G read וַמֵּת, and wrote ὁ δὲ ἀποθνῄσκων
Instead of וְהַחוֹטֶא, G read חַטָּא, and wrote ἁμαρτωλὸς
Instead of יְקֻלָּל, G read וְקֻלָּל, and wrote καὶ ἐπικατάρατος ἔσται
Misreading 3 (adding καὶ) indicates that G was reading yods as waws, that he was expecting waw-prefixed qatals with future meaning. Misreading 1 (adding δὲ) indicates that G read that yod as a waw. This waw would signal to him that a new clause is beginning. He then had to find the best way to express the Hebrew of the clause that just ended (הַנַּעַר בֶּן־מֵאָה שָׁנָה). This was a verbless clause, so he had to supply a verb of being. The context is future, so the verb he supplied was ἔσται. Misreading 2 happened as a consequence of misreading 1. Having committed to a new clause beginning with וַמֵּת, he was reluctant to immediately start a new one. Either he simply ignored the waw and he, or he read the text as if the waw and he were moved to יָמוּת.
21 Instead of the futures καταφυτεύσουσιν and φάγονται (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the subjunctives καταφυτεύσωσιν and φάγωνται.
22 Instead of the future φυτεύσουσιν (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the subjunctive φυτεύσωσιν.
No injustice or harm will be done on Lord’s holy mountain22-
3 According to Kim (2009, 207–8), the words ὁ δὲ ἄνομος with no Hebrew counterpart refer to the same people described in 33:14: priests who had formerly offered improper sacrifices had departed Zion, and the sacrifices offered were thereafter acceptable. The word transcribed as ὕειον was spelled ὕιον in the first-hand of Q, S, and A (which could be the masculine accusative noun “son”), but the neuter context requires an adjective, which is what B has (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Q originally had ὕιον, but that reading was subsequently corrected to ὕειον as in 65:4. Sasson (1976) noted that the presence of the comparator ὡς (corresponding to 1QIsaa כמכה but absent in MT) means even some lawful rituals are a condemned.
I will repay those who rebuff me(66:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 66:3-4]]
4 LEH notes that τὰἐμπαίγματααὐτῶνis a neologism. Instead of ἐμπαίγματα, A has the spelling ἐνπαίγματα. In Isaiah, outside of chapters 7 and 14, the verb ἐκλέγομαι only appears in chapter 40-66; it almost always is a translation of בחר. The form ἠβουλόμηνis imperfect, but the significance of this form rather than the aorist is not clear. There is an allusion in 2 Thess 1:8 to those who do not obey: ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ.
5 Instead of καὶ ἐκεῖνοι (the spelling of S and B), Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have κἀκεῖνοι. In 2 Thess 1:12 the glorification of the Lord’s name is applied to Jesus: ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇτὸὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν.
6 The great voice from the temple is alluded to in Rev 16 at verses 1 (Καὶ ἤκουσα μεγάλης φωνῆςἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ λεγούσης τοῖς ἑπτὰ ἀγγέλοις· ὑπάγετε καὶ ἐκχέετε τὰς ἑπτὰ φιάλας τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς τὴν γῆν) and 17 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν φωνὴ μεγάλη ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ θρόνου λέγουσα· γέγονεν.
7 Chapter 12 of Revelation alludes to the pregnant woman about to give birth to a male child. Verse 2 has: καὶ ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα, καὶ κράζει ὠδίνουσα καὶ βασανιζομένη τεκεῖν. Verse 5 has: καὶἔτεκεν υἱὸν ἄρσεν, and says this child will shepherd all nations with a rod of iron.
8 Instead of ἑώρακεν (the spelling of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), Q and B spell it ἑόρακεν.
9 According to Eusebius, the expectation was given by the prophecies, which predicted future events. When those events took place, those witnessing them should have gained faith; instead they did not remember God (2.57).
10 Instead of an article and participle such as πάντεςοἱἀγαπῶντες, which would match the Hebrew, G uses a relative pronoun and indicative verb in πάντεςὅσοιπενθεῖτε, with no apparent difference in meaning.
12 Instead of the verb with object ינקתם, “you will nurse,” G read the noun with possessive יונקיהם, “your infants.”
13 Instead of καὶ ἐγώ (the spelling also of A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S and B spell it κἀγώ.
14 John 16:22 quotes from this verse with the words πάλιν δὲ ὄψομαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ χαρήσεται ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία.
15 The noun ἀποσκορακισμόνis cognate with the verb ἀποσκορακίζω, which is used in Isa 17:3 and Psalm 26(27):9 in the sense of “dismiss.” The dismissal can refer to execration or cursing. The allusion in 2 Thess 1:8 (ἐνπυρὶ φλογός, διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ) also draws from earlier verses in Isa 66.
16 According to Eusebius, God used physical metaphors in order for the Jews to understand the threats, and Romans 2:5-6 has this verse in mind.
17 The phrase ἐπὶτὸαὐτό is an idiom indicating togetherness, usually of time (“at the same time,” Deut 22:10), location (“at the same place,” Deut 25:5), interaction (fighting together Deut 25:11) or fate (“indiscriminately,” Deut 12:15). The latter is the meaning in this instance. The first-hand of Q again hasκρέα ὕιον as in 65:4 (and ὕιον withoutκρέα in 66:3); A also has ὕιον; Q’s corrector changed to ὕειον (Rahlfs and Ziegler). In S, thereading ϋεια was changed by corrector cb2 to ϋειῶν, and by cb2 again to ϋειον, matching B (ὕειον in Q, Rahlfs and Ziegler).
18 Manuscripts Q, A, and B have no verb ἐπίσταμαι at the end of the paragraph (present in S, 958, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Eusebius read the phrase ἔρχομαι συναγαγεῖν twice; he interpreted κἀγὼτὰἔργααὐτῶνκαὶτὸνλογισμὸνἔρχομαισυναγαγεῖν together: “And I am coming to gather their works and reasonings.” Then he interpreted πάντατὰἔθνηκαὶτὰςγλώσσαςἔρχομαισυναγαγεῖν, “I am coming to gather all the nations and tongues” (2.58).
19 Only here is שׂים translated by καταλείπω; normally καταλείπω is a translation of שׁאר. The Hebrew behind ἐπʼ αὐτῶν is בהמה. Ottley said, “here their rendering, though the idea is easy (cf. σημεῖον αἰώνιον, 55:13), is not what might be expected: nor is והשׁאירתי ‘and I will leave’ very near ושׂמתי, that it should have been misread” (2:386). Instead of σεσῳσμένους with the iota subscript, Swete and Ottley spelled it σεσωσμένους. Θαρσείς is the spelling used by Q, Swete, and Ottley; Rahlfs and Ziegler spelled it Θαρσις. The relative pronoun οἵ is masculine, and could refer either to those saved (σεσῳσμένους) or to the inhabitants of the places just mentioned. Grammatically, the masculine σεσῳσμένους is preferable, but the context prefers the inhabitants because they do not know God. Eusebius read it in the latter way, writing τοῦτο δὴ οὖν “τὸ σπέρμα” τὸ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐκείνων τῶν ἀπολλυμένων διασωθὲν ἐξαποστελῶ φησιν εἰςτὰἔθνη τὰ ἀλλογενῆ καὶ ἀλλόφυλα, εἰςΘαρσεῖςκαὶΦοὺδ καὶΛοὺδκαὶΜοσὸχκαὶΘοβὲλκαὶεἰςτὴνἙλλάδακαὶεἰςτὰςνήσουςτὰςπόρρω, οἳοὐκἀκηκόασιτὸὄνομάμουοὐδὲἑωράκασιτὴνδόξαν μου (2.58). So the “seed” is those saved, and they are sent to the foreign peoples. Instead of ἑωράκασίν (the spelling of S and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), Q and B spell it ἑοράκασιν. Only S includes the words τὰ ἔργα καί, but the corrected reading μου τὴν δόξαν of cb2, shared with B, deserves more attention, despite the reading τὴν δόξαν μου of both Q and A.
20 Adrian Schenker claimed that the Greek μετά ψαλμων is earlier than the Hebrew בכלי טהור (both MT and 1QIsaa). Schenker attributed the change partially to a shift of interest from celebration toward ritual purity (Schenker 2010). Paul mentioned his mission to the Gentiles and the acceptability of their offerings in Rom 15:16: εἰς τὸ εἶναί με λειτουργὸν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα γένηται ἡ προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἡγιασμένη ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.
21 Instead of Λευίτας (the spelling also of S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B spells it Λευείτας.
22 Since chapter 61, Jerusalem has appeared more often than Zion. The stability of what God made is mentioned in Hebrews 12:27: τὸ δὲ ἔτι ἅπαξ δηλοῖ τὴν τῶν σαλευομένων μετάθεσιν ὡς πεποιημένων, ἵνα μείνῃ τὰ μὴ σαλευόμενα. 2 Pet 3:13 alludes to this new sky and new earth (καινοὺς δὲ οὐρανοὺς καὶκαινὴν γῆν) as does Rev 21:1 (Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶγῆν καινήν. ὁ γὰρ πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ ἀπῆλθαν καὶ ἡ θάλασσα οὐκ ἔστιν ἔτι).
All flesh will worship Lord in Jerusalem(66:23)[[@Bible:Isa 66:22-24]]
23 The use of ἐκ for temporal sequence is described in BDAG s.v. ἐκ⑤.ⓑ.α, citing 2 Peter 2:8’s ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας as “day after day.”
Transgressors will become a spectacle(66:24)[[@Bible:Isa 66:22-24]]
24 Instead of τελευτήσει (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has τελευτᾷ, a harmonization to Mark 9:48, which has ὅπου ὁσκώληξαὐτῶνοὐτελευτᾷ καὶτὸπῦροὐσβέννυται.
The book of Isaiah in Greek does not differ in structure from its Hebrew version. It contains the same sections in the same order: the visions against nations (chapters 1-23), first against Judah and Jerusalem (1-12), then against surrounding nations (13-23), with two intervening narrative sections (6-9 and 20); the apocalypse (24-25); the warnings against military alliance with Egypt (26-35), the narratives about Isaiah and Hezekiah (36-39), the Oracles of Comfort (40-55), and the final section promoting ritual purity (56-66).
Isaiah is presented primarily in the form characteristic of Hebrew poetry. Only a few chapters (6-9; 20; 36-39) are presented with a narrative framework. Hebrew poetry is characterized by parallelism, and the Greek translation retains this formal feature. The poetry most commonly conveys messages from Lord God Sabaoth, the Holy One of Israel. The messages are directed to the people of Judah, even if they are addressed to the nations surrounding Judah.
The message varies from section to section, of course, but some uniting themes carry through from beginning to end. The themes include monotheism, trust, reversal, justice and righteousness, pride, judgement, and restoration.
Isaiah has some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world, and this beauty was apparent even in Greek translation. Codex Vaticanus has marginal notes to point out particularly beautiful passages of Isaiah.
Isaiah is one of the three most influential books in Early Judaism. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament both quote from and allude to the Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah more than any other literature. This is the book that shaped Jesus’ self-understanding (Luke 4) and preaching (the upside-down kingdom), and helped Christians make sense of Jesus’ significance, including his role as the suffering servant (49; 53), as righteous judge (11) and his special origins (born of a virgin Isa 7:14; divinity 7; 9). It shaped the self-understanding of the early church as a light to the Gentiles (2; 8) who they thought were replacing the Jews as God’s people because of Jewish rejection of Jesus (6). The book of Revelation drew heavily on the imagery provided by Isaiah, and Isaiah even shaped later ideas about the devil as Lucifer (14).
Chapters 1-23 are united by their form and message. They are prophecies primarily of judgement, in the form of visions. Chapters 1-5 are visions directed against Judah and Jerusalem. Chapters 6-9 continue that geographic interest, but are in the form of narratives about the prophet Isaiah. Chapters 10-12 return to the form of poetic oracles, again in the form of woes.
Title (1:1)
Greek Isaiah opens with an introduction, identifying the genre, the prophet, the topic, and the time. What is not clear is how much of Isaiah this title is intended to cover.
1 The genre is ὅρασις, “vision,” which is also the normal translation of מראה in LXX. That would seem to limit this title to the initial prophecies that could have been preceived by the prophet in a visionary experience. The narratives beginning in chapter 6 would not fit well under the label of vision. The words ἣν εἶδεν “which he saw” have no counterpart in the MT. Perhaps they were added to the translation as an interpolation by analogy with 13:1, which reads Ὅρασις, ἣν εἶδεν Ἠσαίας υἱὸς Ἀμὼς κατὰ Βαβυλῶνος (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 46), creating a relative clause to replace the Hebrew apposition (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 333). Similar unnecessarily repeated expressions appear in 23:6-7; 41:25; 51:11; 57:11; 65:4. Isaiah is called son of Ἀμώς. Although the Hebrew name אמוץ is not spelled like that of the prophet Amos עמוס, in Greek (and Ethiopic) they are the same (Ottley 1904, 1:2.105). This confusion leads the Mart. Ascen. Isa 4.22 (and possibly 1.3) to call Isaiah’s father a prophet as well. Although κατά with the genitive can be used to indicate the topic without value judgement “concerning,” as can the Hebrew על, it more often carries a hostile sense, stronger than that of the Hebrew על (BDAG, s.v. κατά A.②ⓑ) . This is the only place in Isaiah where על is rendered by κατά with the genitive; by far the most common equivalent for על is ἐπί. Isaiah uses κατά with the genitive only eleven times, two of which are in this verse and three others of which are in similar constructions, in 13:1, 15:1, and 17:1 (Babylon, Moab, and Damascus, respectively). Note the parallel with 2:1, which uses περί with the genitive: Ὁ λόγος ὁ γενόμενος παρὰ Κυρίου πρὸς Ἠσαίαν υἱὸν Ἀμὼς περὶ τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ περὶ Ἰερουσαλήμ. Κατά is added before Jerusalem probably because Jerusalem is indeclinable (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 55). The evidence in Matthew chapter 1 indicates that indeclinable names tend to take the article in the dative and accusative cases and omit it in nominative and genitive cases. In place of Hebrew ימי “days” βασιλείᾳ is found (here “reign” rather than “kingdom”) for no evident reason. To improve the Greek style, καί is added between the kings’ names. Οἱ ἐβασίλευσαν represents מלכי,
reading the yod as a waw. In most manuscripts, OI can be understood as the relative pronoun, as the accentuation added to B confirms. The phrase τῆς Ἰουδαίας is in the genitive because βασιλεύω takes the genitive of the subjects ruled. The early Christian interpreters emphasized the supernatural aspect of prophetic “vision.” Origen mentioned the incomprehensibility of “the vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw” in expounding the “well of vision” of Gen 23:11. Eusebius called this “vision” not with eyes, but prophetic, “as the divine Spirit shone upon his soul” (1.1) (McKinion 2004, 3). His comments on the unity of the book are worth quoting: “The reader should notice that the book as a whole appears to have been joined together into a unity, and [that the message] was delivered by the prophet in parts over the duration of several lengthy intervals of time, so that [the book appears] to offer little precise information about the [events that] are to arise. [Isaiah wrote in this fashion in order that] the interpretation of the [prophecies] recorded therein [could be] determined after a while and [so that] the prophecy [would also be] applicable to the events that occurred during each kingdom. After a fifty year period, the time of the appointed kings had been completed, in alignment with what has been said and conveyed through the whole book.” Chrysostom said the prophets “have said nothing on their own initiative … their words are divine oracles and their writings have come down from heaven” (Wilken 2007, 17); “the words come from the hand of God who holds the pen.” The prophecy is about the future: “the souls of the prophets when illuminated by the gift of the Spirit had access to the future” (Wilken 2007, 19). Cyril said the prophets “had knowledge of what was going to happen in the future, since these things had been revealed to them by the Holy Spirit,” but also that “they were informed about the things that were happening in their own time of which they were spectators.” Isaiah “was able to see with the eye of the mind what was going to happen to Judah at a later time.” He saw enemies and war, and “it is to these things that the beginning of the prophecy refers” (Wilken 2007, 19). In Eusebius’ view, the mention of the four kings indicates that the prophecy is against the Jewish nation (1.3). He began with those closest to him, and then moved to prophesying against Babylon and Egypt (1.3). Chrysostom
acknowledged that the kings are named “so that the diligent reader will know the history of that time. If one understands the situation and the remedies that the prophets applied to the trials of the Israelites, the prophecy will be clearer and more understandable” (Wilken 2007, 19). Eusebius called Isaiah an “evangelist,” since he “performed the same duty as the evangelists. For he preaches the Son of God surpassingly” (1.2), referring to the prophecies of the virgin birth (7:14) and the resurrection.
Sub-human knowledge(1:2-3)[[@Bible:Isa 1:2-3]]
The first vision opens with words that anticipate Isa 6:9-10, with its theme of listening without comprehending. The totality of the created order is called as legal witnesses to the fairness of the Lord’s judgment. The prophet implies Israel’s moral capacity is below that of irrational creatures, who at least are able to acknowledge their masters. In Greek, heaven is addressed with the singular οὐρανέ although the Hebrew is plural. The verb ἐνωτίζου “give ear” is etymologically related to ὦτα ears. Κύριος is capitalized because it appears to be considered a proper name, judging by the lack of article. See the discussion on Κύριος in the Introduction. See Exod. 21:28, 29, 36; 22:10-11, 13-14 for κύριος as owner of a ταῦρος. Clement of Alexandria Protr. 10 used this passage to argue that God seeks his creatures. See also Paed. 1.9, Strom. 5.8, and Strom. 4.26, where he said “heaven” refers to the one who contemplates heaven. But Eusebius did not treat “heaven” and “earth” as metaphors; they can hear because they actually have souls (1.5).
2 This very first “vision” has Lord speaking directly. Justin quoted 1:3, 4, 8 to show the Father can be the speaker in prophecy: Ἔγνω βοῦς τὸν κτησάμενον καὶ ὄνος τὴν φάτνην τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ, Ἰσραὴλ δέ με οὐκ ἔγνω καὶ ὁ λαός μου οὐ συνῆκεν. Οὐαὶ ἔθνος ἁμαρτωλόν, λαὸς πλήρης ἁμαρτιῶν, σπέρμα πονηρόν, υἱοὶ ἄνομοι· ἐγκατελίπετε τὸν κύριον. Eusebius likewise took this example of divine speech as an opportunity to explain how prophecy works: “The divine Spirit filled the soul of the prophet with the appropriate power and uttered through the prophetic mouth as through an instrument the things that had been appointed and prepared in advance for the hearers of the words spoken by the Lord” (1.5). To explain ἐγέννησα Scholz and Lowth suggested that G read ילדתי for גדלתי, but Ottley appealed to Ezek 31:4 ἐξέθρεψα as a parallel, where Lord begat and exalted sons. Acts 13:17 has a verbal allusion to ὕψωσα in τὸν λαὸν ὕψωσεν ἐν τῇ παροικίᾳ ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτου, raising the people up in the land of Egypt. (Minuscule 93 has ἐδόξασα.) Eusebius interpreted begetting sons as the creation of Adam and
Eve, created “according to his image,” with rational souls and a γέρους ἐξαιρέτου (“special prerogative?” 1.6). But he also said those deemed worthy to be called the people of God have been honored by the appellation “sons” (1.7), and these are the Gentiles who “will understand,” in contrast to Israel, who “will not understand.” He claimed that, the Holy Spirit reckons the Jewish nation “miserable and the worst of all the nations” for not recognizing the love of God (1.8) and for “abandoning” the Lord Christ (1.10); pride in one’s lineage is folly (1.9) Chrysostom interpreted begetting sons as an act of adoption, a “special act of grace by which they become God’s children,” which in the New Covenant is “the bath of regeneration,” baptism. Cyril said Israel was by grace made worthy to be treated as God’s children, and through faith in Christ, “we have experienced the true spiritual rebirth, begotten by water and the Spirit,” quoting Gal 4:6. These children were not only begotten, but also cared for. Israel was nurtured spiritually by the law and the prophets, to lead to the knowledge of Christ, quoting Gal 3:24. Athanasius said humans were “disinherited because of their rebellion,” and Pharisees are no longer children. The Arians against whom Alexander wrote (1.3) used 1:2 to argue that humans could become sons of God; see also 1:8. Ottley said the usual emphatic force of the nominative third person personal pronoun αὐτοί is “hard to perceive” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:396). ἀθετέω is one of Greek Isaiah’s favourite words. It usually translates בגד, and (as here) it is the normal translation of פשׁע as well. It is used of treaty-breaking and promise-breaking, here with an accusative for the person mistreated, as in Polybius, Histories 9.36.10 and Mark 6:26 in the story of Salome.
3 Israel does not know Lord, the people still do not understand him. Irenaeus (Haer. 1.19.1) quoted 1:3 against the heretics, insisting that the one not known was the Creator, God the Father. See also 4.2.1 and 4.41.2, where those who do not do God’s works are not his children. The noun βοῦς here is a singular (rather than plural accusative) because the sentence requires a nominative subject. The aorist participle of κτάομαι “acquire” is naturally translated “owner.” This is the passage from which the ox and donkey appear in manger (φάτνη) scenes, as models of those who know Lord, in contrast to his people, Israel, who rejects him. Jerome (Epist. 108.10) mentioned “the inn made sacred by the virgin and the stall where the ox knew his owner and the ass his master’s crib.” The noun κυρίου in this single instance in G translates not the tetragrammaton but בעל, “master.” The Hebrew preposition ב, in this case marking the direct object, is rendered with the accusative με, rather than with the literal ἐν. Eusebius insisted on reading not συνῆκεν but συνήσει (Comm. Isa. 1.7), even though the Hebrew has a qatal and Ziegler mentioned no support for the future in either apparatus. The identity
of the accused appears clear enough: Lord’s people Israel. Yet what early Christian interpreters considered open for interpretation is which generation of Israel is in view. Lactantius, Inst. 4.11 saw 1:2-3 referring to the Jews at the time of Christ. Eusebius (1.7) supposed there was an allusion to Christ as well. In Marc. 3.23, Tertullian took the referent to be the period from Tiberius to Vespasian. Barn. 9.3 used 1:2 to argue that God has circumcised the ears of Christians, with the words Ἄκουε οὐρανέ, καὶ ἐνωτίζου γῆ, ὅτι Κύριος ἐλάλησεν ταῦτα εἰς μαρτύριον. Tertullian, Adv. Jud. 3 said circumcision was to distinguish the Jews so that they could be excluded from Jerusalem, as had happened in his day.
Lawlessness provokes injury(1:4-15)[[@Bible:Isa 1:4-6]]
The prophecy shifts from addressing the witnesses to addressing the people directly. Their sin has angered Lord, but the consequences can still be stopped. The cause of the punishments listed here is explained in 1:10-15.
4 The nominative case of ἔθνος is to be expected with οὐαί, which more commonly takes the nominative (14 times) than the dative (7 times) in Isaiah. οὐαί with the dative is by far more common in Isaiah than elsewhere in the LXX (Ezek 13 and Sirach have two instances each). σπέρμα πονηρόν are also nominative, like ἔθνος, λαός, and υἱοὶ ἄνομοι. This phrase appears only elsewhere in 14:20. Thackeray (1978, sec. 17.2) notes the rarity of the non-sigmatic first aorist of ἐγκαταλείπω, which also appears in Sir 41:8. The second person address ἐγκατελίπατε suggests that although the words υἱοὶ ἄνομοι are grammatically nominative, they are semantically vocative. The “people” here were understood by the early Christians as the Jews, the Lord’s “sons,” provoking him by their sins. Eusebius commented, “they did not understand the Christ of God who dwelt among them” (1.11), and he claimed the distress refers to the Roman siege (1.11). The article is present on τὸν κύριον, hence the translation “the lord” not as a proper noun (as it was in 1:2) but as a common noun. See the discussion “Lord” in the Introduction. The Hebrew direct object marker does appear here, but it is not a reliable predictor of when the translator adds τόν, especially in the latter half of Isaiah.
For our English translation, the principle followed is that the earliest intelligible text is to be translated. The words נזרו אחור have no equivalent in G, although Aquila included them as οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ ὁλοκληρία, and they are under asterisk in 48. Mirjam van der Vorm-Croughs commented, “According to e.g. Duhm, Ziegler, and Watts the Isaiah translator may not have read נזרו אחור in his Hebrew manuscript, as ‘the two words appear to exceed the metric form and the compact composition and probably should be judged a gloss.’ In Ziegler’s view the words may have entered the MT version from Isa 42:17 (נסגו אחור). The Qumran manuscripts of Isaiah agree with the MT, however. Hence, it seems more likely to me that the translator omitted the clause in order to shorten the text, because in content נזרו אחור is close to the two preceding lines” (2010, 378), referring to Duhm (1892, 3), Ziegler (1934, 53), and Watts (1998, 14).
5 Because πληγῆτε is an aorist passive subjunctive (of πλήσσω), I translate it as a rhetorical question, “should you be struck.” The Hebrew נכה usually is translated πατάσσω in the OG, as also in a couple of other places in Isaiah. προστίθημι is used here in the sense of “increase” as in Luke 17:5. The participle προστιθέντες indicates the reason for being struck.
A natural reading of the directional preposition εἰς would be that it indicates the fate of the head and heart, but Eusebius understood that the head and heart have an incurable disease (1.11), interpreting this as a prophecy of the Roman siege.
6 The negation in 1:6 is difficult, with a nominative string of three kinds of injury each preceded by οὔτε, followed by three kinds of treatment (neuter nouns, presumably in the accusative), each also preceded by οὔτε, except the first, which has οὐκ ἔστιν. The string of nominatives should normally be interpreted as the subject of the verb οὐκ ἔστιν, and therefore would as indicating the absence of the injuries: “from feet to head there is neither a wound nor a bruise nor a purulent blow, to put on emollient or oil or bandages.” In context, however, this expression must indicate the total absence of treatment, not even for the kinds of injuries listed, hence the translation of ἐπιθεῖναι as “one can treat.” The noun μώλωψ appears only here and Isa 53:5, both translating חַבּוּרָה, precedented by Gen 4:23; Exod 21:25. This is the deserved punishment (Deut 28:59-61) borne by the servant in Isa 53.
As in the rest of Isaiah 1-39, God fights against Israel; this is in contrast to Isaiah 40-66 where God takes initiatives on their behalf. The addressees are guilty—as guilty as Sodom and Gomorrah; they deserve the same fate. Eusebius wrote, “they burned with impiety, like the men who lived in Sodom and Gomorrah, and on account of the similarity of their lifestyle” (1.15). It is only God’s grace that prevented that same fate.
7 First, the desolation of the land is described by means of adjectives. The first, ἔρημος, tends to be used substantivally rather than attributively in Isaiah. This can be demonstrated by the grammatical mismatch in 5:9 (plural subject but singular ἔρημος) and 15:6 (neuter subject but feminine ἔρημος). The pronoun αὐτήν refers to the noun τὴν χώραν. In keeping with the verbless clauses describing the present situation, the perfect ἠρήμωται is used rather than the aorist ἠρημώθη. Likewise, the feminine passive participle of καταστρέφω is in the perfect tense. G turns the Hebrew שְׂרוף אש into a compound word (see also 9:5; 64:10). Finally, a present tense verb κατεσθίουσιν provides the time frame for the preceding list of adjectives. Justin Martyr (1 Apol. 47) took this as a prophecy that Jesus and his followers would be killed, and Cyprian that the Jews would lose Jerusalem and leave their land.
8 The future verb ἐγκαταλειφθήσεται indicates the desolation is to continue. This is
the first mention of a vineyard, an image that gets developed in chapters 5 and 27. Eusebius (1.12) recognized the vineyard here as the same one mentioned in 5:7: the entire nation. The hut is then the temple. ὀπωροφυλάκιον occurs also in 24:20, also translating מלונה. In Ps 78:1 and Micah 1:6 and 3:12, it translates עי. The present tense of πολιορκουμένη refers to a city in the process of being besieged. According to Irenaeus, the administration of the Jews was temporary. Tertullian said they should be prohibited from entering the holy city, that hardly anyone knows God (Marc. 4.24), they rejected the invitation to Christ (Marc. 4.31) and Jerusalem was left deserted by the escape of the cherubim (Marc. 4.42). Eusebius noticed the abandonment of the Lord in 1:4 is paralleled by the abandonment by the Lord in 1:5-6. The abandonment is the siege of Jerusalem, leaving the area and nation a wilderness (1.13).
9 The conditional is a classic example of a second-class contrary to fact conditional (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.2). The aorist tense in both the protasis and apodosis assumes that God had indeed left a seed. Unlike the other prophets, G transliterates צְבָאוֹת as σαβαώθ. The phrase ἐγκατέλιπεν ἡμῖν σπέρμα recalls Deut 3:3 ἐπατάξαμεν αὐτὸν ἕως τοῦ μὴ καταλιπεῖν αὐτοῦ σπέρμα, regarding Og of Bashan. As in Deut 3:3, σπέρμα translates שׂריד (in its only occurrence in Isaiah), which is usually translated by a form of σῴζω. Σόδομα is not feminine singular but neuter plural (its genitive is Σοδόμων in 1:10). Although the function of λαός is vocative, the nominative form is used. Isa 1:9 is quoted in Romans 9:29, with the implication that Isaiah was speaking to Paul’s situation. It is also quoted by Justin Martyr (1 Apol. 53 and Dial. 140). The overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah is mentioned in Matt 10:15; Luke 10:12; Jude 7; Rev 11:7-8. Revelation 11:8 notably alludes to Isa 1:9 by designating name Sodom as “spiritual” (metaphorical): καὶ τὸ πτῶμα αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τῆς πλατείας τῆς πόλεως τῆς μεγάλης, ἥτις καλεῖται πνευματικῶς Σόδομα καὶ Αἴγυπτος, ὅπου καὶ ὁ κύριος αὐτῶν ἐσταυρώθη. Eusebius took the “seed” to refer to the apostles (1.14), berating the “children of the Jews” for boasting in their ancestors’ virtue, claiming their wickedness was equal to that of Sodom and Gomorrah.
10
The Sodom and Gomorrah symbolism is extended beyond the simile of 1:9, directly calling the nation Sodom and Gomorrah. If it had not been for Lord’s mercy, they would have suffered the same fate as those notorious cities, implying that their sins were equally grievous. Addressing the people as those cities makes the point even more vividly. προσέχετε “pay attention” translates אזן as in 1:2; there it was rendered ἐνωτίζου. In translating אלהינו as θεοῦ, G apparently ignored the suffix (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 232). The nominative form λαός is used with a vocative function. Barnabas 9.3 quotes Isa 1:10 as Ἀκούσατε λόγον κυρίου, ἄρχοντες τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, changing Sodom to “this people.” The Amherst Papyrus of the Mart. Ascen. Isa. 3.10 refers to this passage: καὶ τὴν Ἱ(ε)ρουσαλὴμ Σόδο(μ)α ἐκάλεσεν, κ(αὶ τοὺς) ἄρχοντα(ς Ἰούδα) καὶ Ἰσραὴλ (λαὸν Γο)μόρρας πρ(οσηγό)ρευσεν.
11 If in 1:10 the desired behaviour is expressed; the implication is that the behaviour expressed in 1:11 is what has been happening instead. Presumably, the people have been sacrificing animals without listening to what God said. Because πλήρης takes its complement in the genitive, ὁλοκαυτωμάτων is what God was full of. The accusative objects of βούλομαι are στέαρ and αἷμα. The phrase ταύρων καὶ τράγων recalls Deut 32:14, which reads, βούτυρον βοῶν καὶ γάλα προβάτων μετὰ στέατος ἀρνῶν καὶ κριῶν, υἱῶν ταύρων καὶ τράγων μετὰ στέατος νεφρῶν πυροῦ, καὶ αἷμα σταφυλῆς ἔπιον οἶνον. Hebrews 10:4 borrows a phrase from Isa 1:11: ἀδύνατον γὰρ αἷμα ταύρων καὶ τράγων ἀφαιρεῖν ἁμαρτίας. Barnabas 2.5 has a few minor changes (from κριῶν, ἐὰν, τὴν αὐλὴν μου, καὶ ἡμέραν μεγάλην). Underlining indicates verbatim agreement; breaks in the underlining indicate
differences, in this quote: Τί μοι πλῆθος τῶν θυσιῶν ὑμῶν; λέγει κύριος. πλήρης εἰμὶ ὁλοκαυτωμάτων, καὶ στέαρ ἀρνῶν καὶ αἷμα ταύρων καὶ τράγων οὐ βούλομαι, οὐδʼ ἂν ἔρχησθε ὀφθῆναί μοι. τίς γὰρ ἐξεζήτησεν ταῦτα ἐκ τῶν χειρῶν ὑμῶν; πατεῖν μου τὴν αὐλὴν οὐ προσθήσεσθε. ἐὰν φέρητε σεμίδαλιν, μάταιον· θυμίαμα βδέλυγμά μοί ἐστιν· τὰς νεομηνίας ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ σάββατα οὐκ ἀνέχομαι. See Williamson (1993) for further discussion.
12 God continues expressing disdain for ritual behaviour, this time for appearing in the temple. The conditional introduced by ἂν uses the subjunctive (of ἔρχομαι) ἔρχησθε. The reality of such third-class conditionals is indeterminate, simply presenting a hypothetical situation (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.3). The passive of ὁράω with the dative “appear to” is popular with Luke; see Acts 7:26, 30, 35. Robertson wondered if the passive is causative here in ὀφθῆναί μοι and in Acts 26:16. Typically, מִן is the Hebrew word behind ἐκ, although מִן just as often is translated ἀπό, as in 1:15.
13 Flour, incense, and holy days are not what God seeks. προστίθημι is a standard translation of יסף, the Hebrew way of expressing continuation. The word for fine flour, σεμίδαλιν, usually is a translation of סלת, but here it is from מנחה, which is usually translated θυσία. The word for fasting, νηστείαν, usually is a translation of צום, but here it is from און “iniquity” (MT and 1QIsaa), which is usually translated ἀνομία. Lowth suggested G misread צום for און, which is likely, since G would not miss a chance to use ἀνομία; he has a tendency to use ἀνομία even when it is not derivable from the Hebrew (Seeligmann 2004, 272). The word ἀργίαν is formed from the alpha privative on ἐργία, so the meaning is the absence of work. In this context, a holiday is in view, even though this is not the common meaning of ἀργία.
14 The word ἀνήσω is from ἀνίημι, “give up” translating נשא (which is usually translated by αἴρω), as also in 2:9; 42:2; 46:4. Ottley suggested ἀνοίσω, which fits נשא better, and sounds similar to ἀνήσω, but this too translates נשא only four times in Isaiah. Silva translated ἑορτή as “holidays” with a note: “Or rest; possible idleness.” Silva translated ἐγενήθητέ μοι εἰς πλησμονήν “You have made me full,” with a note: “Or You have become repugnant to me.” The preposition εἰς
translates the Hebrew preposition ל, which otherwise is often represented by the dative case. The phrase τὰς ἁμαρτίας ὑμῶν has no counterpart in Hebrew. Van der Vorm-Croughs categorized this as an addition of a nominal object, which is “formed of words that appear in the surrounding, or that are parallel to expressions in a neighbouring clause” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 103).
15 The verb ἀποστρέψω translates אַעְלִים, “hide.” Τypically, מִן is the Hebrew counterpart to ἀπό, although מִן just as often is translated ἐκ, as in 1:12. Eusebius, Comm. Isa. 1.16 said regarding the “rulers of the nations” at the time of the Savior, that “their hands were full of blood through the murder against the Christ”; he claimed the text says, “I will no longer forgive your sins” (see also 1.17). The theme of God refusing to hear the prayers of certain people appears also in Matthew 6:7 and John 9:31. Matthew uses ἐὰν πληθύνητε τὴν δέησιν, οὐκ εἰσακούσομαι ὑμῶν, and John has ἁμαρτωλῶν ὁ θεὸς οὐκ ἀκούει. Philo said much the same thing in Spec. 1.271, that God has no desire for physical offerings.
Repent and be clean(1:16–20)[[@Bible:Isa 1:16-20]]
The message of this paragraph is that Lord requires justice; repentance brings prosperity; refusal brings destruction. The early Christians applied this paragraph to Christians in their own day. Clement of Rome (1 Clem. 8.4) quoted 1:16-20, explaining that God wanted those he loved to have an opportunity to repent, so “let us obey his great and glorious will,” but four variants appear in the manuscripts (Hatch 1889, 177). Origen said, “Unless you were washed in this way, you cannot put on the Lord Jesus Christ,” quoting Rom 13:14. The “washing” is on one hand, removing wicked deeds from one’s soul (Didymus), but also the grace of Baptism, according to Eusebius, who quoted from Tit 3:5 in his commentary (1.7), and Gregory of Nyssa (Wilken 2007, 26). Tertullian associated this passage with John 4:23-24: “We are the true worshipers and true priests, who, praying in spirit, offer a spiritual sacrifice, an offering fitting and acceptable to God.”
16 Just as the answer to physical bloody hands is washing, so the solution to metaphorical bloody hands is to clean them, which takes the form of removing (aorist imperative of ἀφαιρέω) vices (1:16). The phrase ἀπὸ τῶν ψυχῶν is a translation of מעלליכם. Govett (1841) suggested G read מעל לביכם. Consistency in the English rendering of ψυχή is elusive, since “soul” and “self” each carry connotations not carried by ψυχή. The phrase παύσασθε ἀπό translates one Hebrew word, חדלו because παύω usually is followed by a preposition. Cyril of Jerusalem
took 1:16 as a command to the people of his own day to repent. “He asked that we offer this sacrifice, and he foresaw that we would do so.” Similarly, Augustine explained, “God seeks us, not what belongs to us,” and “we are told to spend money on the needy,” connecting this passage with Luke 6:37-38, and Aphrahat wrote as if Isaiah were answering the questions of the people. Didymus said, “to such as these, the Lord speaks through Isaiah” (Wilken 2007, 27).
17 The solution to the bloody hands continues with the aorist imperatives of μανθάνω, ἐκζητέω, ῥύομαι, κρίνω, and δικαιόω. Removing vices entails replacing them with goodness and altrusitic fairness. The Hebrew causative היטב is rendered with an auxiliary verb καλὸν ποιεῖν. Κρίσιν in G is typically (e.g., 1:21; 1:24; 5:7; 10:2; 11:4; 33:5; 56:1; 58:2; 59:4; 59:9; 59:11; 59:14; 63:1) a desirable thing because of its fairness, so “fair judgement” or “justice” is preferable to simply “judgment,” because in English “judgment” carries negative connotations of punishment (as it hardly ever does in G; possible exceptions are Isa 4:4; 40:27; 54:17). Ottley noted the dative ὀρφανῷ is unusual with κρίνω, but it is found also in Ps 10:18 (9:39) and again in Isa 1:23. The dative χήρᾳ (like ὀρφανῷ) is found in the original hand of Vaticanus, as well as one manuscript of 1 Clement 8.4 (Ottley). BDAG lists in its own category this single use of κρίνω with dative of advantage, as quoted by 1 Clem. 8:4. The dative with κρίνω might seem to occur also in 1 Cor 11:13, but this dative is part of the prepositional phrase ἐν ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς, not a dative of advantage, given its placement after ὑμῖν rather than after κρίνατε. If the accusative had been used with κρίνω, it would imply condemnation rather than a judgement in favour of the orphan. Note ὀρφανῷ and χήραν are both anarthous. The allusion in Matt 23:23 is not verbal, but they share the view that good deeds are more desireable than ritual observance. The image of red and white corresponding to wickedness and purity is found in Rev 17:4.
18 The washing metaphor continues with Lord’s offer to negotiate generously. He is not interested in punishment; he desires reconciliation. The verb διελέγχω normally has the sense of an adversarial dispute to discern right from wrong, except possibly in the two LXX instances. The aorist passive in this sense also appears in Micah 6:2. Grammatically, the puzzle is that it is passive in form and first person plural. How can only one of the parties be convicted or refuted when both are the subject “we”? It is best therefore to interpret it in a middle sense without a result in view. φοινικοῦν refers to a red purple (Danker 1992) derived from shellfish. The conjunction δέ appears with no Hebrew basis, as it does some 40 times in G.
Lord offers to turn two kinds of red, symbolizing vices, into two examples of whiteness (symbolizing fairness). Κόκκινον is a cheaper, lighter scarlet red than φοινικοῦς. On the basis of 1:18, Basil of Caesarea said the great physician of souls “is ready to deliver not you alone, but all who are enslaved by sin” (Wilken 2007, 28).
19 The promise of reconciliation to Lord instead of rebellion is prosperity, but the recipients must be willing, a sentiment expressed through the intransitive use of θέλω.
20 Unwillingness is shown by not listening. Instead of εἰσακούσητε one would expect a form of ἀπειθέω for מרה as in 50:5 and also 3:8; 63:10; cf. 30:9. As it stands, the two paths in 1:19-20 are more obviously contrasted. The consequence of not listening is being devoured (κατεσθίω) by a short sword μάχαιρα, symbolizing a violent death. Κατεσθίω can form its future as either κατέδομαι or the Hellenestic καταφάγομαι (BDF sec. 74(2)). The oracle ends with the formula τὸ γὰρ στόμα κυρίου ἐλάλησεν ταῦτα. The corresponding Hebrew כי פי יהוה דבר appears also in Isa 40:5; 58:14. The addition of ταῦτα also occurs in Isa 58:14. Eusebius (Comm. Isa. 1.18) found the fulfilment of 1:20 in the Roman invasion; he said, “These predictions were in fact fulfilled at once after they were delivered. Those among the aforementioned rulers and Jewish people who did not listen to the saving grace were immediately (not after a long while!) delivered to the sword of the enemy—the Romans, who invaded them and conquered everywhere with the law of war. … They were delivered even to this [fate] because they were disobedient to the calling of the grace of Christ.” But Eusebius did not identify the “wronged” man as Jesus.
Ζion’s rulers are rebels(1:21–31)[[@Bible:Isa 1:21-23]]
21 A new prophecy laments Zion’s immoral practices. Van der Vorm-Croughs noted alliteration here: the beginning repetition of the κ in κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν, and κρίνοντες καὶ κρίσιν χήρας; the ἀ in ἄρχοντές σου ἀπειθοῦσιν and the chiastic α δ in ἀγαπῶντες δῶρα, διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 178). Because πιστὴ Σιών is more definite than πόρνη πόλις, the subject of πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιών is “faithful Zion” and the complement is “an immoral city.” The name Σιών has no counterpart in the Hebrew. Justice “slept” (κοιμάω) in this city when it was faithful, before it became immoral, so sleeping there must be understood as lodging there. The phrase ἐν ᾗ was added to the translation, resulting in smoother Greek, since turning this clause (which is independent in
the Hebrew) into a relative clause provides a hypotactic rather than paratactic structure.
22 Verses 22 and 23 continue listing various ways Zion is untrustworthy. In commerce, neither buyers nor sellers can be trusted. Their money is ἀδόκιμον, which etymologically would mean unapproved; Ottley added αἱ πόλεις ὑμῶν πυρίκαυστοι in square brackets because A repeats a clause here from 1:7. A κάπηλος is a small businessman, but with a negative cheating connotation. Modern English has comparable words “dealer” or “peddlar.” But often, especially in the context of mixing drinks, it refers to a tavern keeper. The Hebrew uses a passive construction, not specifying who is doing the mixing. Thackeray (23.2) noted that μείγνυμι does not occur in the active; μίσγω is used instead (Thackeray 1978, 246). Although the normal Greek word for wine, οἶνος is used here, the Hebrew has an unusual word סבא. Eusebius said the formerly faithful city was probably Jerusalem at the time of David (1.19) because that is when faithful people built it. It was “faithful” because it was “full of justice” and “righteousness.” But Eusebius said 1:22 “could be interpreted in harmony with the above statements about the times of our Savior,” so that the worthless money (of the fornicators, thieves, and murderers) would refer to the Jewish δευτερώσεις μύθικας apocryphal “myths” of Titus 1:14 and 1 Tim 4:7 (1.19). They are thieves for their complicity with Judas (1.20).
23 The unfaithfulness of Zion is focused in the rulers, in 1:23. ἀπειθέω (opposite of πείθομαι) translates סרר also in Isa 65:2, where it also is translated with ἀντιλέγω. Of its 15 occurrences in Isaiah, ἀπειθέω is the translation of 8 different Hebrew roots. It is used in contexts involving resistance, overlapping in meaning with the English “rebel” “refuse” and “disobey.” Sometimes the object is personal, sometimes a way of conduct, and sometimes there is no object. Here it is the main verb; its subject applies to the other five nominative plurals in the rest of the verse. κλεπτῶν is not the nominative participle of κλέπτω, since a nominative is already present in κοινωνοί “fellows,” so it is the genitive of κλέπτης. LSJ lists only biblical references in its entry on ἀνταπόδομα. It refers to what is given in exchange, in other words “repayment,” or “recompense.” GELS lists this instance as the only example of the meaning “kick-back.” Q appears to have εὖ rather than οὐ, but other editors have not noted this. The noun κοινωνοί indicates that the following participles ἀγαπῶντες and προσέχοντες, in apposition, should be understood as substantives rather than modifying the main verb. If they were modifying the main verb, the translation could be “Your leaders break trust, companions of thieves, by loving gifts, by pursuing rewards, by happily passing judgement on orphans, and by not regarding a widow’s case.”
Justin Martyr (Dial. 82) said God reproaches (ὀνειδίζει, present tense) the rulers of the Jewish people in 1:23: Οἱ ἄρχοντες ὑμῶν κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν, φιλοῦντες δῶρα, διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα. Again in Dial. 27 he alluded to the same verse: κοινωνοὶ κλεπτῶν καὶ φιλοῦντες δῶρα καὶ διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα, ὀρφανοῖς οὐ κρίνοντες καὶ κρίσει χήρας οὐ προσέχοντες. The Didache (5.2) uses the expression Διώκοντες ἀνταπόδομα from 1:23. Irenaeus (Haer. 4.2.6) claimed that Isaiah 1:23 spoke of the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day.
24 Lord Sabaoth proclaims he will not tolerate this unfaithfulness. He promises a restoration back to the original status (from the beginning) when Zion was a faithful city. The real master is Lord Sabaoth; he is called ὁ δεσπότης (a reading omitted in V), which typically (as here and in 3:1; 10:33) renders האדון when this Hebrew word is not suffixed (otherwise it is translated κύριος). Οὐαί is the standard transliteration of הוי. Οὐαί can also appear with the dative following. The second person “you” is implied from ἐπὶ σὲ in 1:25, although there it is singular. Hebrew behind the plural οἱ ἰσχύοντες is singular. The translation rearranges the words so that it is the strong ones (in the nominative) who are to dread. The Hebrew has God as the strong one of Israel, with no specific adressees. Because it is indeclinable, Ἰσραήλ could be understood as nominative (in apposition to οἱ ἰσχύοντες), or genitive. If genitive, the relationship could be subjective and partitive (those Israelites that have power) or objective (those who have power over Israel). Verses 25 and 26 indicate that Israel, not just the leaders of Israel, are being addressed. Corresponding to παύσεται the Hebrew has a first-person verb אנחם. G appears to have read a third person verb נח and then חֵמָה or חמתי. Evidently he thought the הוי was misplaced. When he moved הוי to before אביר, the lamed of Israel and aleph marking the first-person verb אנחם came together as לא, resulting in Greek οὐ (which has no counterpart in the Hebrew). אבירישראלהויאנחםמצרי was read as אבירי ישראל לא נח חמה בצרים. The Greek preposition ἐκ translates the Hebrew preposition מ in מאויבי. The awkwardness of the English translation “execute from” is intended to mimic the awkwardness of the Greek κρίσιν ποιεῖν ἐκ, although “extract from” might provide the sense better. Eusebius interpreted 1:24 to mean that the wrath will punish the rulers and the powerful of the nation (Comm. Isa. 1.21).
25 Lord Sabaoth’s justice first involves removing the unfaithful rulers. He promises to bring his hand upon (ἐπάγω) them, and make them καθαρόν, a
neuter adjective serving as abstract noun or indefinite substantive “something pure.” The sense is then of God refining his opponents. He will remove (ἀφαιρέω), them, which in this context implies doing away with them. G apparently did not know what בדיל might mean in this context (although it appears in Num 31:22 as κασσίτερος, “tin”) and since he was at loss, used ἀνόμους, a favorite stand-in of his. ἀπειθοῦντας translates a different Hebrew word סִיג than in 1:23 (סרר). Eusebius said Isa 1:25 describes a refining process by which the city, the Church of God, again becomes “full of justice,” when the remnant chosen by grace (the disciples; cf. Romans 11:5,) is among them; the judges and counselors are the apostles and disciples (1.21), and the city is now founded on a rock (Matt 7:25). This new divinely favoured government (τὸ σύστημα τοῦ θεοφιλοῦς πολιτεύματος) is what is faithful.
26 The purpose of the purging is to restore the situation back to the way it was originally (τὸ πρότερον). The transitive use of ἐφίστημι in 1:26 (which is how the present, imperfect, future, and 1st aorist active are used) is not found in the NT. The noun ἀρχή has two meanings, depending on whether it is preceded by a preposition (ἀπʼ in 1:26; 2:6; 22:11; 23:7; 42:9; 43:13; 44:8; 45:21; 48:8; 63:16; ἐξ in 19:11; 40:21; 41:26; 43:9; ἐν in 51:9), in which case it refers to time (“beginning”), or if it does not follow a preposition (9:5, 6; 10:10; 19:15; 41:27), it refers to authority. The phrase ὡς τὸ ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς appears again in Isa 2:6 and Isa 63:19. Without ὡς, the phrase τὸ ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς appears in Joshua 24:2; 2 Kgdms 14:26; Pss Sol 17:30 The expression does seem awkward, but it also appears in Demosthenes In Aristocratem 148, Ὅσα μὲν δὴ στρατιώτης ὢν ἐν σφενδονήτου καὶ ψιλοῦ μέρει τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἐναντία ἐστράτευται τῇ πόλει. The form is still second person in κληθήσῃ, but this shifts to third person in the next clause, both in Hebrew and Greek, indicating a change of addressee, and implying a change of speaker. The city is transformed into a μητρόπολις πιστή, in contrast to the πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιών of 1:21. The explicit naming of the city Σιών may have been read back into Isa 1:21. The meaning of the expression μητρόπολις πιστὴ Σιών is clearer than the earlier πόρνη πόλις πιστὴ Σιών of 1:21, which now in retrospect, might be understood as “faithful city Zion … became a harlot.” 1 Peter 2:6 likely draws on (among other parts of Isaiah) this image of a restored city and its righteousness.
27 Verse 27 is not obviously linked to what precedes, other than the mention of judgment, the theme of restoration, and the mercy Lord is showing in restoring Zion. There has been no mention of captives or their need to escape. There is no word in MT corresponding to γάρ; G has added it to draw a causal connection between the two sentences. Along with κρίσις, κρίμα is one of the normal translations of מִשְׁפָּט. The two are synonyms for G, and are often paired
with δικαιοσύνη. Even though G does not distinguish between the two nouns from the same root, a reader would perceive a difference, in that nouns ending in –σις imply a process (judging fairly), and nouns ending in –μα imply a result (the verdict). Perhaps the translation ἡ αἰχμαλωσία is the result of G reading שִׁבְיהָ “her converts” rather than שָׁבֶיהָ (Ottley 1904, 1:2:390). Concrete “captives” are being rescued here, not the abstract “captivity,” as in Numbers 31:12; 1 Macc 9:70, 72; Judith 2:9; 1 Esdr 6:5. Eusebius understood this verse to mean that “not all will return but only those who are determined worthy. One should understand the return from captivity as the conversion of souls from error to the true knowledge of God” (Comm. Isa. 1.22; also 1.32). This verbless clause might be expected to take its verb from the preceding parallel clause’s σωθήσεται, but because that makes little sense, only the tense is drawn from that clause: “will be.”
28 The conjunction καί joins this section to the previous. The implication is that the restoration of the righteous city involves the destruction of the sinful. The imagery conveys the inescapability of their fate. The fire imagery may have influenced Isa 33:11 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 271). G used a varied vocabulary to convey the destruction of the wicked. Although in Luke 4:18 συντρίβω refers to the oppressed, the meaning here is more like that of Romans 16:20, where Satan is crushed underfoot. It is rare for a passive form of συντελέω to have a personal subject.
29 Ziegler identified the reading αἰσχυνθήσονται (rather than καταισχυνθήσονται) as hexaplaric (Ziegler 1939, 44). The Hebrew preposition is מִן, which normally is translated ἀπό, though Q is unique in reading ἐν. G apparently read אֱלֹהִים (as in Isa 37:19) or אֱלִילִים (as in Hab 2:18) where the MT has אילים. The next verse has אלה (without yod) translated as τερέβινθος. The three oldest manuscripts disagree about the reading where Q and S* have ἐπῃσχύνθησαν (the reading chosen by Rahlfs and Ziegler). A has a future ἐπαισχυνθήσονται; B has an aorist ᾐσχύνθησαν. The translator saw the Hebrew waw-prefixed prefix conjugation ותחפרו. He read it as a normal wayyiqtol,
so made it καί with the aorist. But the Masoretes read it differently: they pointed this as a wyiqtol, which normally becomes καί with the future in Greek. ἐπαισχύνομαι with ἐπί and the dative occurs in Romans 6:21 to refer to the thing of which one is ashamed. The imperfect ἠβούλοντο has the alternative augment ἠ-, which is commonly used not only on on θέλω, but three other verbs with related meanings: βούλομαι, δύναμαι, μέλλω. In most biblical books, the imperfect augment is ἐ-, but in Isaiah we see ἠ- in 1:29, 30:9, 15 (in B); 65:12; 66:4, and ἐ- in 30:15; 42:24; 65:12 (in QAB), 66:4 (in AB). 1 Macc is the other book with ἠ- (1 Macc 4:6; 5:48; 11:45, 49; 12:14; 15:27) (Thackeray 1978, 197–98). The aorist of βούλομαι rarely appears in the translated parts of biblical Greek (only in Exod 10:27; 1 Kgdms 22:17; 28:23; Ps 35:4; 39:9; Pr 1:10; Jer 6:10). The accusative object indicates the thing desired. It is unclear why one would be ashamed of κήποις, “gardens.” G is simply translating the Hebrew גנות. Eusebius noted, “As concerns the gardens, their fathers finished with these idolatrous practices for the most part” (1.23). The neuter relative pronoun in ἃ ἐπεθύμησαν does not match the masculine κήποις.
30 The infirmity of the lawbreakers and sinful is presented with two pairs of similes. The first pair (in 1:30) are vegetation: a leafless tree and a waterless park. τερέμινθος is the common spelling of this tree in Alexandrinus and Vaticanus, and τερέβινθος by all the uncials in Isa 1:30; 6:13; etc. (LSJ s.v. τέρμινθος). It appears in Gen 43:11 for pistachio nuts. Here we have אלה (without yod), whereas the preceding verse has אילים, translated εἰδώλοις. Because τερέβινθος is feminine, ἀποβεβληκυῖα, the perfect participle of ἀποβάλλω, is also feminine.
31 The other pair of similes are flammable: flax and sparks, indicating the wicked will be conclusively burned. Eusebius read “Their works are like sparks, in as much as their deeds are causes of fire” (1.25). στιππύον, an alternative spelling for στυππεῖον, is coarse flax fiber. It is a material that is gathered, in Sir 21:9, and it is fuel in Dan 3:46. Στιππυϊνος appears in Lev 13:47, 59 for a kind of garment, “linen.” The image effectively conveys weakness. The phrase οἱ ἄνομοι καὶ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοί makes the Hebrew phrase meaning “the two of them” explicit. The future participle of σβέννυμι by itself would refer to one who can extinguish something, hence the more idiomatic translation, “no one to extinguish it.”
The word about Judea and Jerusalem(2:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 2:2-4]]
1 Ὁ is written as an indented. Isaiah and Micah have a very similar oracle. Micah 4:1-3 (Rahlfs) reads, Καὶ ἔσται ἐπʼ ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐμφανὲς τὸ ὄρος τοῦ κυρίου, ἕτοιμον ἐπὶ τὰς κορυφὰς τῶν ὀρέων, καὶ μετεωρισθήσεται ὑπεράνω τῶν βουνῶν, καὶ σπεύσουσιν πρὸς αὐτὸ λαοί. καὶ πορεύσονται ἔθνη πολλὰ καὶ ἐροῦσιν Δεῦτε ἀναβῶμεν εἰς τὸ ὄρος κυρίου καὶ εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ θεοῦ Ιακωβ, καὶ δείξουσιν ἡμῖν τὴν ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ πορευσόμεθα ἐν ταῖς τρίβοις αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐκ Σιων ἐξελεύσεται νόμος καὶ λόγος κυρίου ἐξ Ιερουσαλημ. καὶ κρινεῖ ἀνὰ μέσον λαῶν πολλῶν, καὶ ἐξελέγξει ἔθνη ἰσχυρὰ ἕως εἰς γῆν μακράν, καὶ κατακόψουσιν τὰς ῥομφαίας αὐτῶν εἰς ἄροτρα καὶ τὰ δόρατα αὐτῶν εἰς δρέπανα, καὶ οὐκέτι μὴ ἀντάρῃ ἔθνος ἐπʼ ἔθνος ῥομφαίαν, καὶ οὐκέτι μὴ μάθωσιν πολεμεῖν. The Naḥal Ḥever Greek Minor Prophets Reconstruction of Micah is closer than Rahlfs to the wording in Isaiah. It reads, καὶ κρινεῖ ἀνὰ μέσον λαῶν] πολλῶ[ν καὶ ἐλέγ]ξει ἔθνη ἰσχυρὰ ἕως μα[κράν, καὶ συνκόψουσιν τὰς] μαχα[ίρας αὐτῶ]ν εἰς ἄροτρα καὶ τὰς σιβύ[νας α]ὐτῶν [εἰς δρέ]πανα, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἀνθάρῃ ἔθν[ος ἐ]φʼ ἔθνος μ[άχαιραν, καὶ οὐ μὴ μάθωσιν ἔτι πολεμεῖ[ν.
2 The prophecy is introduced in an unusual way, with the word ὅτι (2:2). There is no verb of perception or communication that would demand a recitative conjunction, nor does the clause after Ὅτι offer a reason for or cause of what precedes. The adjective ἐμφανής in its nominitive neuter form matches the subject τὸ ὄρος. The phrase ἐπʼ ἄκρων τῶν ὀρέων is probably attributive rather than predicative. In other words, it is not “The house of God is on the peaks of the mountains” (predicating something about the house of God) but “The house of God that is on the peaks of the mountains” (specifying an attribute of the house of God). The translation of גבעה “hill,” is βουνός, as usual. Usually ἥκω translates בא, but here the Hebrew behind ἥξουσιν is נהר.
Matt 5:14 echoes Isa 2:2; both use mountains as symbols of universal visibility, as Matthew says, οὐ δύναται πόλις κρυβῆναι ἐπάνω ὄρους κειμένη. Acts 2:17 uses an expression that appears only in Isa 2:2, but then follows it with a quotation from Joel: καὶ ἔσται ἐν ταῖς ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις, λέγει ὁ θεός, ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ πᾶσαν σάρκα. Rev 15:4 alludes to Isa 2:2 in topic and phrasing: ὅτι πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιόν σου, ὅτι τὰ δικαιώματά σου ἐφανερώθησαν.
3 The image of the νόμος of God going out from Jerusalem (2:3) appears also in Isa 51:4. The context of νόμος in Isa 8:16, 20; 24:5, 16, and maybe 33:6 fit the Mosaic law, but in Isa 1:10; 2:3; 5:24; 42:4,24; 51:4, 7 the νόμος is more like instruction or advice or legal judgements than the “law” of Moses. For example, the word of the Lord in 1:10-18 asks them to expend less on what Moses had commanded. Isa 1:19-20 is similar to the refrain in Deuteronomy, but changes commands / decrees / ordinances to being willing and “listening” to the Lord. Notably, νόμος in 2:3 is indefinite in both Isaiah and Micah. John 4:22 possibly alludes to Isa 2:3, with its sense that salvation is from the Jews. Justin (1 Apol. 39) quoted 2:3 as a prophecy of the apostles and of Christian conversion. In Dial. 24 he quoted it as evidence of a new covenant that has gone forth. Irenaeus (Haer. 4.34.4) agreed, saying the word went forth from Jerusalem by the apostles. Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 1) quoted 2:3 referring to the celestial word that comes from Zion. Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 3.8-9) said 2:3-4 is Isaiah foretelling the new law of the Christians: “Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices?” Eusebius agreed that the Christians have a new law: “Therefore, they were unwilling [to receive] the law of the New Testament, and they even provoked the living word of God” (1.39). In the Apostolic Constitutions 5, 2:3 is used to claim God’s word is transferred to the Gentiles. Origen (Cels. 5.33) considered it more like an allusion than a fulfillment, but held that it refers to Christians.
4 The subject of κρινεῖ in 2:4 is unclear. It could be the Lord, or his word, or his law. Eusebius suggested Christ might be the evangelical law, and said the evangelical word judges between the nations (1.26). The phrase λαὸν πολύν appears also in Gen 50:20; Num 21:6; Deut 20:1; Josh 17:14-17 in the sense of “many people.” In the plural, it is a
favourite expression of Micah (4:3, 13; 5:6, 7). This instance of συγκόψουσιν is the only occurrence of συγκόπτω “break up” in Isaiah. Here it translates כתת, as in Deut 9:21. In 4 Kingdoms, it translates קצץ. Muraoka’s entry on ζιβύνη (GELS) indicates that this kind of spear can also be spelled with σ-, and appears in parallel with μάχαιρα in Isa 2:4; δόρυ in Mic 4:3, τόξον in Jer 6:23, έγχειρίδιον in Jer 27:42. A δρέπανον is an implement with a curved blade, normally a farm tool, but also a weapon in Herodotus, Hist. 5.112.2. G uses the subjunctive οὐ μὴ μάθωσιν rather than the future used for λήμψεται. λαμβάνω (148 times) is not quite as commonly used as αἴρω for נשׂא (185 times in OG).
Foreign influences(2:5–9)[[@Bible:Isa 2:5-9]]
The need for an invitation to return to Lord is explained by the separation between Lord and his people, and the reason for this ruptured relationship. Foreign influences are the problem: omens, offspring, wealth, military, and objects of worship have all come in from outside.
5 The function of οἶκος is vocative, although the form is nominative. Isa 50:11 has an expression similar to πορευθῶμεν τῷ φωτὶ in πορεύεσθε τῷ φωτὶ. Instead of an accusative, which would express motion towards, we find a dative. Whether this dative is locative or instrumental, the meaning is the same: the light of Lord illuminates one’s path. Justin (Dial. 135) quoted 2:5 to the effect that the Jews have been rejected, with the words Καὶ νῦν σὺ οἶκος τοῦ Ἰακὼβ, δεῦρο καὶ πορευθῶμεν ἐν φωτὶ κυρίου· ἀνῆκε γὰρ τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ, τὸν οἶκον Ἰακὼβ, ὅτι ἐπλήσθη ἡ χώρα αὐτῶν, ὡς τὸ ἀπαρχῆς, μαντειῶν καὶ κληδονισμῶν.
6 The verb ἀνῆκεν is from ἀνίημι, which is not forgive but abandon or “let go,” translating נטשׁ. נטשׁ in Isaiah is usually translated ἐγκαταλείπω, which would fit here as well. Presumably κύριος from the end of the preceding verse is the subject. The object, τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, is in apposition with τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ. The subject of ἐνεπλήσθη (from ἐμπίπλημι) is χώρα. The phrase ἡ χώρα αὐτῶν has no equivalent in the Hebrew. The expression τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς is adverbial, indicating when the place was filled with omens. The feminine noun elided in ἡ τῶν ἀλλοφύλων is χώρα from the first half of the comparison. The meaning of the noun χώρα overlaps with “land,” “region,” and “country,” but I have chosen “territory” as a standard replacement for χώρα because “land” overlaps better with γῆ, “region” lacks the clear boundaries implied by χώρα, and “country” implies too much socially: nationality and belonging. The territory is full of κληδονισμῶν, “soothsaying”; κληδονισμός “diviner” here translates ענן, from a reading of
Deut 18:14, also in plural. In Isa 57:3 ענן becomes ἄνομος. ἀλλόφυλος is a translation of פְּלִשְׁתִּי, and here also of נָכְרִי. Note that ἐγενήθη is from γίνομαι, not γεννάω.
7 The past tense of ἦν likely was chosen simply to suit the context, in which case its similarity in sound to אַיִן is entirely coincidental.
8 The noun phrase τῶν ἔργων is not in apposition with βδελυγμάτων because βδελυγμάτων has no article, yet ἔργων does. Ziegler and Rahlfs have οἷς ἐποίησαν, in agreement with Q, A, and S’s corrector cb2; the case is dative by attraction to the verb προσκυνέω, which takes its object in the dative. Revelation quotes Isa 2:8, which is the only other place the exact phrase τῶν ἔργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν appears. Rev 9:20 reads, Καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, οἳ οὐκ ἀπεκτάνθησαν ἐν ταῖς πληγαῖς ταύταις, οὐδὲ μετενόησαν ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν, ἵνα μὴ προσκυνήσουσιν τὰ δαιμόνια καὶ τὰ εἴδωλα τὰ χρυσᾶ καὶ τὰ ἀργυρᾶ καὶ τὰ χαλκᾶ καὶ τὰ λίθινα καὶ τὰ ξύλινα, ἃ οὔτε βλέπειν δύνανται οὔτε ἀκούειν οὔτε περιπατεῖν. Cyprian (Ep. 63.1) quoted 2:8-9 to prove the importance of repentance.
9 The Greek ἔκυψεν represents the Hebrew שׁחח, which normally is translated by ταπεινόω, as in the rest of this chapter (verses 11 and 17), but that verb is used in the parallel expression, which has שׁפל. Like שׁחח , שׁפל is also normally rendered by ταπεινόω. Κύπτω “bend down” provides a more physical image. The identity of the (anarthous) person (ἄνθρωπος … ἀνήρ) is unclear. Cyprian, the only Ante-Nicene Father to quote this verse, took it to be the idolaters just mentioned (Fort. 3; Laps. 7; Letter 63.1), but he was working from Latin, where the absence of the article is not an issue. Cyril of Alexandria took it to be humanity in general (Comm. Isa.). The singular first-person subject of ἀνήσω (from ἀνίημι) must be Κύριος from 2:1, unless the subject be Isaiah. The Hebrew has a second person verb here. Perhaps the change from second person to first person was a visual error in Egyptian cursive Aramaic script, in which Aleph is shaped similarly to Taw. Aleph appears as and Taw as (Gesenius and Kautzsch 1910, xvii). Ottley suggested ἀνοίσω was intended, as in 1:14, as a translation of נשׂא. The verbs ἔκυψεν and ἐταπεινώθη continue to describe how the idolators are worshiping their idols. The passive voice of ἐταπεινώθη is used here in a middle sense.
Normally ἀνίημι takes its object in the accusative. With the accusative, the the meaning is most naturally abandonment; with the dative, forgiveness is also possible: “I will not remit them their sin,” like ἀφίημι. In Isa 2:6, the accusative is used with ἀνίημι and the affirmation is that Lord has let them go. Here the dative is used, and the statement is negative: Lord will not let them off.
Lord shatters the land(2:10–19)[[@Bible:Isa 2:10-11]]
10 The addressees are warned that Lord’s radiance is so overpowering as to make hiding underground attractive. Because the variant reading εἰσέλθετε for εἰσέλθατε is also an aorist imperative, there is no difference in meaning. The expression ἀπὸ προσώπου, meaning “presence,” is a literal translation of the Hebrew, but it is also attested in Greek before the LXX. BDAG cites Ctesias (5th-4th BCE): 688 Fgm. 9 Jac., which has φυγεῖν ἀπὸ προσώπου Κύρου. The phrase ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν is not represented in MT; it recurs in 2:19, and 21. ὅταν is indefinite, but “whenever” (the normal English way of indicating indefiniteness) is not appropriate because it implies multiple repeated events. 2 Thess 1:9 quotes Isa 2:10 or 19 or 21, οἵτινες δίκην τίσουσιν ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ. 2 Thess 1:10 continues the borrowing (from 2:11 or 2:17) with ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐνδοξασθῆναι ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ καὶ θαυμασθῆναι ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύσασιν, ὅτι ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς, ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ. Quarles argued that 2 Thess 1:9-10 identifies Christ with the Lord in Isa 2:10 (Quarles 1997). Rev 6:15 alludes to the same scriptures (Isa 2:10 or 2:21 and Isa 2:19) with its Καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς καὶ οἱ μεγιστᾶνες καὶ οἱ χιλίαρχοι καὶ οἱ πλούσιοι καὶ οἱ ἰσχυροὶ καὶ πᾶς δοῦλος καὶ ἐλεύθερος ἔκρυψαν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰς τὰς πέτρας τῶν ὀρέων. Isa 2:19 contributes the phrase εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ.
11 The two verbless predicative clauses οἱ γὰρ ὀφθαλμοὶ κυρίου ὑψηλοί and ὁ δὲ ἄνθρωπος ταπεινός in 2:11 are not quite parallel because ἄνθρωπος is nominative but κυρίου is genitive. It is not the eyes of humanity but humanity itself that is low. Κυρίου has no counterpart in MT. Although the two words ταπεινός and ταπεινωθήσεται are cognate in Greek, in the Hebrew these two words are from different roots. The same is true for ὕψος and ὑψωθήσεται. The phrase ὕψος τῶν ἀνθρώπων refers to the high position of people. Given the common conception that monotheism is promoted in the Bible, it may be surprising to note that here in 2:11 we find one of the few pairings of Κύριος μόνος in the Greek scriptures. In Isaiah we have the identical expression in 2:17. The only others are Exod 22:19;
Deut 32:12=Odes 2:12; 1 Kgdms 7:4; 3 Kgdms 18:22; Dan 3:45; Esd B 19:6; Sir 18:2; Odes 14:26. The “day” referred to by ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ is when Lord rises, i.e., ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν.
12 The theme introduced in the preceding paragraph is the essence of this paragraph: human arrogance will be brought down. In the phrase ἡμέρα γὰρ κυρίου σαβαωθ ἐπί, the preposition ἐπί is used in a hostile sense. Because the following verbless predicative clauses are in a future context, the English translation includes “will be.” ὑβριστήν and ὑπερήφανον are synonyms, describing haughty arrogant people. The pair ὑψηλὸν καὶ μετέωρον represents only one word in the MT: נשׂא; ὑψηλόν was used of Lord in 2:11. The instance of ταπεινωθήσονται in 2:12 translates a different Hebrew word than in 2:11. Here it is שָׁפֵל there it was שׁחח. Tertullian (Marc. 4.33) recalled Isa 2:12 when condemning pride, and Cyprian (Ep. 54.3) used it to threaten punishment for the arrogant.
13 In Hebrew the cedars are plural, so the Hebrew adjectives modify the cedars. But G understood the cedar as singular, so did not use the adjectives τῶν ὑψηλῶν καὶ μετεώρων attributively. The difference in Hebrew is only a yod, the smallest letter, on the end of ארזי The genitive could be understood as possessive or partitive. Instead of all of Lebanon being high and lofty, if possessive the people who have the cedars are high and lofty, and if partitive, some of the high and lofty cedars selected from the others. The acorn (βαλάνου) implies an oak tree.
14 Although the adjective ὑψηλόν is not present (modifying ὄρος), there is a corresponding Hebrew word הרמים in the MT.
16 The noun θέαν is accented as θέα “sight,” not θεά “goddess.” Κάλλους is from κάλλος, ους, τό “beauty,” not the adjective καλός. Ottley’s comment is insightful: “πλοίων seems here to be a mistaken addition; the rest is not far from the Heb., ‘images,’ or ‘objects of desire’: to the root שׂכה is by many assigned the meaning ‘to see,’ so that θέα in the sense of ‘an object of sight’ is very near,
and κάλλος represents חמד also in 53:2. Cf. Plat. Resp. X. 615 A, διηγεῖσθαι θέας ἀμηχάνους τὸ κάλλος. Vulg. has here omne, quod visu pulchrum est” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:114). Van der Vorm-Croughs commented under the category she titled “Two renderings in genitival relationship reflect distinct readings or interpretations of the Hebrew” as follows: “LXX Isaiah offers two different interpretations of …: (a) a plural form … “ship” (=πλοίων); and (b) a (not attested) substantive noun from the root … (“to look at”), meaning “images” (≈ θέαν).” She noted, “Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchungen, 61. Goshen-Gottstein, on the contrary, wrote that πλοίων is a plain addition, not deriving from … (HUB Isa, 8)” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 35). This expression would most naturally have been read as “every sighting of ships of beauty,” i.e., against every appearance of a beautiful ship, which makes little sense in this context. Unfortunately Eusebius is no help because he skipped this section in his commentary, and continued directly to 2:22.
17 The verb ταπεινωθήσεται translates the same Hebrew word as in 2:11, which is not the same as in 2:12. .
See also the note on ὕψος at 2:11; the same Hebrew word רום is behind both. Again, as in 2:11, Κύριος μόνος represents one of the rare collocations of these two words. Irenaeus Haer. 4.33.13 quoted Isa 2:17 to say that after the ascension, God will cast down his opponents. See the discussion of the reception of 2:10-11 for the allusion between Isa 2:17 and 2 Th 1:10.
18 An earlier paragraph (2:10) advised the addressees to hide in the rock and ground; here they are prophesied to bring their idols with them. The case of the neuter τὰ χειροποίητα πάντα could be nominative or accusative. Because the first word of verse 19 is clearly a nominative masculine and must be the subject of κατακρύψουσιν, the neuter χειροποίητα must be the accusative object of this verb.
19 The Hebrew has only one word, במערות, where the Greek has seven: εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰς τὰς σχισμάς. The expression ἀπὸ προσώπου is rare but not unattested in Greek by this time. In any case it would be familiar to those who had read the scriptures in
Greek. The phrase ὅταν ἀναστῇ θραῦσαι τὴν γῆν occurred earlier in 2:10; and this time the MT includes it. It occurs again in 2:21. Tertullian alluded to 2:19 in Marc. 4.30; 4.36 and Herm. 34. He also used it to show that the resurrection is a future event, since God has not yet shattered the earth (Res. 22). See also the discussion on the reception of 2:10-11 for the allusions to Isa 2:19 in 2 Thess 1:9 & Rev 6:15.
Idols discarded, to hide from Lord(2:20–21)[[@Bible:Isa 2:20-21]]
20 Because G was at a loss when encountering the Hebrew חפר פרה, he used one of his favourite standbys ματαίοις. G used ματαίος for twenty different words, most often תהו (4 times). In place of ἐποίησαν, Alexandrinus has the singular ἐποίησεν, to match ἄνθρωπος. See the discussion of the reception of 2:10-11 above for allusions and echoes between Isa 2:19 and 2 Thess 1:9 & Rev 6:15.
21 The reason the idols are cast out is given in 2:21; it is τοῦ εἰσελθεῖν, an infinitive of purpose. One must rid himself of all that baggage in order to flee.
22 Verse 2:22 is missing in G. Croughs wrote, “As a whole, the Greek Isaiah does not contain many of such extensive minuses, the preponderance of the units which are not represented in the translation numbering not more than
three words” (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 380). This verse is present in 1QIsaa, so despite Eugene Ulrich (2001, 292–93), Arie van der Kooij argued that it was omitted by G intentionally (2006b).
Lord Sabaoth removes Judea’s leadership(3:1–9)[[@Bible:Isa 3:1-5]]
1 The relation of the section beginning chapter 3 to what precedes is unclear. On one hand, the cessation of the refrain about shattering the earth indicates a new oracle begins here. On the other hand, there is no explicit introduction beyond Ἰδοὺ δή (3:1), and there is some thematic continuity. The future of Judea’s leadership is in question; the removal of these leaders could easily take place at “that day” of chapter 2. Ἰδού is the standard translation of הנה. It does more than point to something; it draws the hearers’ attention. Although particles are not common in G; δή appears here as the standard equivalent of נא. δή occurs most commonly in the books of Judges to 4 Kingdoms, and also in the minor prophets. The word האדון only appears in Isaiah and Malachi 3:1. Isaiah uses it only as part of the phrase האדון יהוה צבאות, in Isa 1:24; 3:1; 10:33 rendered ὁ δεσπότης Κύριος Σαβαώθ, and in 10:16; 19:4 as just Κύριος Σαβαώθ. The future ἀφελεῖ (ἀφαιρέω) is translated here from the Hifil participle of סר. Ἰουδαίας represents יהודה. In the LXX, only 45 times of 806 is יהודה rendered Ἰουδαία. Over half of those are in Isaiah; the others are in Psalms, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, 2 Chronicles, Esdras B, and Zechariah. Normally יהודה becomes Ἰούδας; 156 times it is indeclinable Ιουδα. However, in Isaiah, יהודה becomes Ἰουδαία 12 times, Ἰούδας 13 times, Ιουδα 2 times, and Ἰουδαῖος once. In Codex Vaticanus, Jerusalem and Judea are reversed. Cyprian (Test. 1.21-22) interpreted the strength of bread and water to mean that “the Jews would lose while we should receive the bread and the cup of Christ.” Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13; Marc. 2.23; 5.8) saw in 3:1, 3 a prophecy that God would take away the Holy Spirit from Jerusalem, but in Marc. 5.6 he interpreted the builder as Paul.
2 Silva translated γίγαντα as “mighty one” with a footnote: “Or giant.” ἄνθρωπον (“a warrior person”) is present in the Greek because the Hebrew has איש מלחמה. The καὶs in this chain are linking separate nouns, not adjectives all modifying one noun, so instead of “a powerful and warrior person” with the correction the English would be “a powerful man and a warrior person.” The word στοχαστής is unattested earlier than G. LSJ offers the gloss “diviner” (i.e., of the future, in Josephus, War 4.289),
but the root concerns guessing more broadly. Philo used it three times, (Opif. 45; Spec. 1.61; Praem. 46) in the sense of guessing or conjecturing. See also Agatharchides De mari Erythraeo, 8 (2nd C. BCE).
3 In MT, the “amazing” and “counsellor” are separated by a disjunctive accent וּנְשׂ֣וּא פָנִ֑ים וְיוֹעֵ֛ץ and therefore refer to two people, but θαυμαστόν σύμβουλον indicates one amazing counsellor. The Greek words used for the “wonderful counsellor,” פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ of 9:5(6) are not the same: Μεγάλης βουλῆς. The phrase συνετὸν ἀκροατήν refers to an “intelligent student” (a “hearer” in James 1:23-25). G apparently did not understand לחש (the word does not appear in the Pentateuch); the two other times he had to deal with it he either left it out (3:20), or took it as an adjective μικρός (26:16). Paul in 1 Cor 3:10 used a phrase from Isa 3:3, in Κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι ὡς σοφὸς ἀρχιτέκτων θεμέλιον ἔθηκα, ἄλλος δὲ ἐποικοδομεῖ. Theodoret mentioned the “excellent councillor” in his letter To an Unknown Correspondent. Origen quoted 3:1-3 to show that the Christ divorced the synagogue, since the Jews are no longer able to keep their commandments, such as stoning, and those requiring the temple (Comm. Matt. 14.19). For more on the history of this verse see Stegmüller’s work (1967).
4 The future of ἐφίστημι (3:4) is causal, and when ἐφίστημι has double accusative objects, one of the objects is established as the other. The noun ἐμπαίκτης is related to the verb ἐμπαίζω “ridicule,” hence “ridiculers,” but תַּעֲלוּלִים is an abstract noun, “wantonness.” G is consistent in his rendering; Isa 66:4 also has ἐμπαίγματα for תעלול. Jude 18 uses a word from Isa 3:4, in ἐπʼ ἐσχάτου χρόνου ἔσονται ἐμπαῖκται κατὰ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἐπιθυμίας πορευόμενοι τῶν ἀσεβειῶν. Tertullian saw in this verse the lawyers who put heavy demands on the people (Marc. 4.27).
5 The verb συμπίπτω means “fall together” in the sense of collapse. προσκόπτω carries both physical and figurative senses: stumbling against, and feeling or giving offense. The two words ἄτιμος and ἔντιμον are mirror images of each other. The alliteration of initial M-sounds in Hebrew is replaced by alliteration of initial I-sounds in Greek. Clement of Rome quoted 3:5 οἱ ἄτιμοι ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐντίμους when describing the jealousy of
his readers (1 Clem. 3.3). Justin (Dial. 24) used 3:5 to apostrophise the Gentiles. Although there are no direct verbal parallels, Isa 3:5-6 is reminiscent of the enmity described in Mic 7:6: διότι υἱὸς ἀτιμάζει πατέρα, θυγάτηρ ἐπαναστήσεται ἐπὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτῆς, νύμφη ἐπὶ τὴν πενθερὰν αὐτῆς, ἐχθροὶ ἀνδρὸς πάντες οἱ ἄνδρες οἱ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ.
6 The removal of leaders by Lord Sabaoth leads to desperation on the part of the populace. The verb ἐπιλαμβάνω, “lay hold of,” takes its objects ἀδελφοῦ and οἰκείου (a household member) in the genitive. Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; Q’s corrector deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, here in 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; and from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5. The criterion for one’s selection as a leader (owning clothing) is just as unexpected in the Hebrew as in the Greek. The demand to become a leader is in the imperative (aorist of γίνομαι). Where G has τὸ ἐμόν indicating who owns the food, MT has הזאת “this.” Silva translated ὑπό as “under” because σε is in the accusative, with a note: “Or supplied by.” ὑπό is not G’s usual translation of תַּחַת, which more commonly is rendered ἀντί, but ὑπό is more appropriate here because ὑπό can carry the sense of “under the control of,” as Muraoka noted when adducing the similar expressions in Deut 33:3 ὑπὸ τὰς χεῖράς σου … ὑπὸ σέ είσιν; Ps 143:2 ύποτάσσων τόν λαόν μου ύπ’ έμέ, and 1 Macc 10:38 γενέσθαι ύφ’ ένα ‘to come under one ruler.’
7 The poverty is such that even those who were begged to be leaders have no food or clothing. The leadership candidate’s objection is that he does not in fact have clothing, or bread for that matter. The phrase ἀποκριθεὶς ἐρεῖ recalls the similar use of ἀποκριθείς in the Gospel narratives. A time reference is given as τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, which is when Lord Sabaoth removes the leadership (3:1). MT has תְשִׂימֻ֖נִי in place of ἔσομαι; as Tov noted, this is a change from passive to active.
8 The perfect of ἀνίημι refers to the condition of no longer being held together or coherent, so the English released or collapsed would be appropriate glosses. For αἱ γλῶσσαι αὐτῶν μετὰ ἀνομίας Silva has “their tongues are joined with lawlessness”; Ottley translated as “their tongues (are) with transgression.” The Hebrew behind μετὰ ἀνομίας is ומעלליהם “and their deeds,” from the same root as תַּעֲלוּלִים in section 16 above. ἀνομία is a favourite lexical item of G when he is at a loss. The proposition μετά carries the sense of accompaniment. Since G interpreted ומעלליהם with the previous clause, he now had to insert τά before πρὸς κύριον ἀπειθοῦντες. The church fathers do not comment on what these might be. The phrase τὰ πρὸς κύριον appears in the scriptures only in Deuteronomy. Deut 9:24 has ἀπειθοῦντες ἦτε τὰ πρὸς κύριον. ἀπειθέω appears 13 times in Isaiah, translating
מרה 3 times, מאס twice, סרר twice, איב once, יסר once, סיג once, and סרה once. It is the most common translation of מרה in the Pentateuch, especially Deut. Possibly G read the samek in סרר יסר and סרה as a mem. Normally this verb takes its object in the dative, so the accusative limiting this verb, τὰ πρὸς κύριον, is not a direct object but a more general adverbial modifier “with respect to the things regarding Lord.” The aorist indicative occurs with a present adverb νῦν ἐταπεινώθη, translating עני as if from ענה, “humble” rather the MT’s עֵנֵי, “eyes.” The words Διότι νῦν have no counterpart in MT. G read the ו as a conjunction rather than a suffix on כָּבוֹד as in MT.
9 The aorist form of ἀνθίστημι, ἀντέστη, “set against” sounds like its Hebrew counterpart עָנְתָה, from עָנָה “answer.” ἀνθίστημι refers to opposition or resistance; Eusebius wrote that their tongues and practices were against the Lord and provoked him (1.29). The ending on Σοδόμων is plural because the lexical form Σόδομα is neuter plural. The genitive indicates “like that of Sodom.” Because ἐμφανίζω denotes making something evident, ἐνεφάνισαν is an appropriate paraphrase of לֹא כִחֵדוּ “they did not hide.” Eusebius interpreted this provocation in word and deed in light of the following section, in which the just man is bound.
Woe to plotters of evil(3:9–10)[[@Bible:Isa 3:9-11]]
9 Woe is directed against Jerusalem and Judea for their handling of the righteous. G has them plotting καθʼ ἑαυτῶν, which although Silva translated “against them,” would most naturally have been read reflexively, as Eusebius has it, “they have given evil counsel against their own soul, or rather, they suffered these things according to that which was resolved” (1.29).
10 They say, Δήσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, a masculine noun. In two cases, Justin reads δήσωμεν here, as does G. But instead of δήσωμεν the commentary of Eusebius has ἄρωμεν, as does Justin’s Dial. 136. Wisdom of Solomon 2:12 has ἐνεδρεύσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡμῖν ἐστιν καὶ ἐναντιοῦται τοῖς ἔργοις ἡμῶν, but Barnabas 6.7 (according to Lightfoot) follows G exactly. Barnabas says the prophet speaks against Israel, that Isa 3:9 foretells Jesus’ suffering. Hegesippus may have applied the phrase τὸν δίκαιον to James “the Just;” Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 2.23.13) considered the martyrdom of James fulfillment of this verse. But Justin Martyr quoted 3:9-15 as a curse on the Jews for doing “such things” against Christ (Dial. 133), “publishing throughout all the land bitter and dark and unjust things against the only blameless and righteous Light sent by God” (Dial. 17). Rufinus found the binding of the just one fulfilled by Judas’ betrayal of Jesus (A Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed 20). G changed the subject to δύσχρηστος, but retained the meaning; the MT has טוב “it is good.” G could be understood as
“he is inconvenient.” The particle τοίνυν appears in G four times, more than any other translated book of the Greek Bible (it is common in 4 Macc). The plural γενήματα translates פרי “product, fruit,” which in the Pentateuch tends to be rendered καρπός, but in G is so rendered only at 37:30. The subject of φάγονται must still be Judea, from 3:8. Justin (Dial. 17; 133; 136; 137) saw the Jewish rejecters of Jesus in 3:9-10.
Woe to lawbreakers(3:11–15)[[@Bible:Isa 3:9-11]]
11 To translate רשׁע G used another favourite that he often drew on when at a loss: ἀνόμῳ. Its twenty instances in G translate 14 different Hebrew words, but it does not appear in the Pentateuch. Origen (Comm. Matt. 13.30) saw in 3:11 a warning for judgement day. He quoted the clause “according to the works of our own hands shall it happen unto us” as a parallel to Matt 7:2.
12 That the woes are not directed to the entire population of Judea is evident from the sympathetic treatment of “my people” beginning in 3:12. G took Λαός μου as a vocative; perhaps this explains the second person pronouns that follow, where MT has the third person. The second person pronouns in the MT appear only in the second half of 3:12. It is specifically those in authority that are judged; a πράκτωρ is a court official responsible for collecting debts. There are two meanings for the Hebrew root עול behind מעולל, translating καλαμῶνται: (1) suckle or (2) act wrongly. G chose neither of these, deriving the meaning instead from עלל “glean.” G understood ונשים “and women” as נגשים, i.e., the πράκτορες who demanded (ἀπαιτοῦντες) repayment.
For the typically feminine τὴν τρίβον (the reading of S, A, and Ziegler); Q, B, and Rahlfs have τὸν τρίβον. Normally τρίβος is feminine, but LSJ provide some examples of masculine forms in Euripides and Plutarch. Cyprian applied 3:12 to church elders who permit communication with the lapsed: “They who call you happy cause you to err, and destroy the path of your feet” (Ep. 27.2 and Laps. 14). “They who call you happy” are the Christians who soothe the lapsed with flattery, which is pernicious (Test. 3.115).
13 Instead of extortion, Lord insists on justice. G highlighted the contrast with Ἀλλὰ νῦν to which there is no counterpart in MT. The verb καταστήσεται would mean “set down” if transitive, but in this context it is middle, intransitive “stand.” For example, we find καταστὰς ἔλεγε in an assembly, in Herodotus, Hist. 1.152.1, meaning “he stood and began speaking.” The preposition εἰς here indicates purpose, i. e., “for” in the sense of not “on behalf of judgement” but “for the purpose of judgement.”
14 No pronoun corresponding to αὐτός is present in MT; likely αὐτός is a repeated translation of הוה as הוא. Bar-Asher wrote on a similar Hebrew-only phenomenon (2013). The nominitive ὑμεῖς provides focus. The interrogative τί applies to two questions, the second being the verbless question ἁρπαγὴ τοῦ πτωχοῦ ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις ὑμῶν.
15 The meaning of καταισχύνετε is the same kind of disgrace as in 1 Cor 11:4. The rhetorical questions serve to identify which behaviours are unjust.
Women of luxury will be humbled(3:16-26)[[@Bible:Isa 3:16-26]]
16-26 Women who now enjoy luxury can expect to have their fortunes reversed. As Ottley noted, satire is achieved simply by listing the various cosmetic devices, and the exact nature of each one is of minor importance. Therefore G can be forgiven for adding a couple of items to the Hebrew list (in 3:18), and perhaps guessing at some of the more obscure vocabulary. The differences between the Hebrew and Greek are so great that Ziegler was reluctant to call this section a translation at all (1934, 208). Michael van der Meer found literary dependence on Exodus 35:22 and Numbers 31:50, where luxury items are dedicated to the priests (2008b, 588). Arie van der Kooij noticed that the luxury items were divided into the same two categories typically used for dowries: clothing and adornments (2004, 129–30). This section was popular among the church fathers. Clement of Alexandria seems to have had 3:18-23 in mind in his critique of ornamentation in Paed. 2.13 and 3.11. Cyprian said Isaiah “chides the daughters of Sion” for “departing from God for the sake of the world’s delights” (Habit. virg. 13). In explaining why Christ addresses only men in his admonitions against lust, Chrysostom offered Isa 3:16 as “His rebuke for them in particular” (Homily 17, on Mt 5:27). He also quoted Isa 3:16, 24 in Homily 89 (on Mt 27:62, 64) and Homily 8 (on 1 Timothy 2:8–10), to rebuke women who are vain.
16 As in most of the OG, יַעַן is translated by ἀντί in the phrase Ἀνθ ὧν, the first occurrence of יַעַן in Isaiah. But after this, perhaps recognizing the awkwardness of ἀντί here, G does not render it as ἀντί again, but prefers ὅτι. νεῦμα is a sign which can be done in time to music, or as a command.
It normally corresponds to the English “nod,” but probably because of ὀφθαλμῶν, Silva uses “wink” instead. The noun πορείᾳ is related to the more familiar verb πορεύομαι and refers to a way of going. Twice G adds ἅμα, with nothing corresponding in the MT. The meaning of παίζω is to actively amuse. We might say “play around” or “have fun.” Silva has “being playful.”
17 In place of ὁ θεός MT has אדני. The noun σχῆμα is often used for the outward appearance (rather than reality), which as the object of ἀποκαλύπτω, would mean the women’s figures would be exposed. But σχῆμα could also mean the character or characteristic property of the women. I suspect the translator did not understand the Hebrew word פֹּת (“socket”) in 1 Kgdms 7:50 and guessed at something that would fit the context.
18 Especially in the plural, κόσμος refers to women’s ornamentation. The English word “cosmetic” is derived from κόσμος, but that is an inappropriate translation here because cosmetics tend to be preparations applied to the body rather than objects of decoration. Also in Isa 3:18, 26. One of the ornaments (ἐμπλόκιον) is according to van der Meer “a valuable stitch work of golden threads entwined into the hair” (2008b, 590) rather than the hair-clasp our lexicons suggest. In its entry on κοσύμβος LSJ refers only to this instance, giving the meaning “hair-net,” which seems to me far from certain. Related words κοσύμβη and κοσυμβωτός tend to indicate “fringe.” Tertullian mentioned these in The Apparel of Women 2.10. The adjective μηνίσκους denotes something moon-shaped, i.e., a crescent.
19 A κάθεμα appears around one’s neck in Ezek 16:11. In Clement of Alexandria they are necklets (Paed. 2.13).
20 The words καὶ τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦ κόσμου have no counterpart in MT. σύνθεσιν refers to a combination, in this case of clothes, i.e., a suit or wardrobe.
The collection of jewellery is reminiscent of Exodus 35:22 and Numbers 31:50. Some of the vocabulary is rare: χλιδών is a bracelet (2 Kingdoms 1:10); ψέλιον is an armlet (Genesis 24:22); ἐμπλόκιον is a hair-clasp; περιδέξιον is a right armlet.
21 The adjective περιπόρφυρος means purple-edged, normally referring to clothing. The similar word μεσοπόρφυρα means made of another colour and purple.
22 G was at a loss as to how to render חָרִיט, so he guessed τὰ κατὰ τὴν οἰκίαν. The nature of τὰ διαφανῆ Λακωνικά (the transparent Spartan things) is not specified. Ottley referred to the διαφανῆ χιτωνία in Aristophanes Lys. 48, which does fit the context.
23 The phrases καὶ τὰ βύσσινα καὶ τὰ ὑακίνθινα καὶ τὰ κόκκινα and σὺν χρυσίῳ καὶ ὑακίνθῳ are not found in MT. Συγκαθυφαίνω appears here as a neologism, apparently meaning “interweave.” An alternate spelling of θερίστριον is attested in θέριστρα, a summer garment, used for adornment of the head in Genesis 24 and 38. Van der Meer’s research identified the θερίστρον as a “cap,” “shawl,” or “scarf” (2008b, 595), intended not to hide but to adorn. In LSJ, κατακλειστος is glossed “shut up.” The meaning of this hapax legomenon is usually sought for in the cognates κατακλίνω, κατακλινής, and κατακλιτέον, which refer to being bed-ridden due to illness. Van der Meer rejected this interpretation and suggested κατάκλιτος is an etymological guess of the meaning of הרדידים, from ירד “go down” (2008b, 596).
24 The reversal of fortunes are expressed in a series of contrasts introduced by ἀντί. A pleasant (ἡδύς) scent (ὀσμῆς) is replaced by a cloud of dust. The second person form ζώσῃ (from ζώννυμαι “belt up”) appears unexpectedly. In the Hebrew, the second person pronoun appears at the beginning of verse 25, but as a possessive suffix. The genitive τοῦ χρυσίου modifies τοῦ κόσμου. Origen quoted 3:24 in Princ. 2.3.6, to discuss the “world” (κόσμος), appealing to Wisdom 18:24. In Wisdom, κόσμος has a philosophical meaning that is foreign to most of the rest of the LXX. The noun φαλάκρωμα is cognate with the adjective
φαλακρός (bald). The phrase ἕξεις διὰ τὰ ἔργα σου has no counterpart in MT.
25 The loss will not be limited to possessions. What the women hold even more dear, their men, will also be taken. The phrase ὃν ἀγαπᾷς is not represented in MT and does not appear elsewhere in OG.
26 The noun θῆκαι generally refers to receptacles, in this case because of τοῦ κόσμου jewelery boxes come most immediately to mind. But θῆκαι is also used of graves and sheaths, so a double meaning is possible here, given that the families of the women are to be killed. It is impossible for the impersonal nominative θῆκαι to “mourn,” so the subject of πενθήσουσιν is likely an unspecified group of mourners. The second person addressee changes from plural ὑμῶν to singular καταλειφθήσῃ. The epsilon at the beginning of ἐδαφισθήσῃ is not an augment but part of the lexical form; it is the future passive of ἐδαφίζω.
Shortage of men(4:1)
1 The future hardship of women continues to be in view, in language reminiscient of the shortage of leaders in 3:6. This would be the logical consequence of the death of sons and men mentioned in 3:25. Marriageable men will be so rare that that the women promise to be self-sufficient if only they can be married. MT begins chapter 4 with words not represented in G, ביום ההוא; they are probably a late gloss (Williamson 2006, 1:294). LSJ says καλεῖν ὄνομα ἐπί τινι is to give a name to something, citing Plato’s Parmenides 147d, as well as καλεῖν τινὰ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός (Luke 1:59), and the passive καλεῖσθαι ἐπί τινι in Gen 48:6, but those use the dative case, unlike the accusative κεκλήσθω ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς found here. Polybius has ἐπʼ ὀνόματος καλεῖν τινα, but that is genitive. The instances in the Greek Bible in which καλεῖν ἐπί are used with the accusative all refer to something being summoned to that thing in the accusative case. Jeremiah 25:29 may be a parallel, with ὠνομάσθη τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπʼ αὐτήν. Victorinus included “the seven women of Isaiah” in a list of biblical sevens explaining the importance of the number seven (On the Creation of the World). He also claimed the “one man” is Christ, the seven women are seven churches, the bread is the Holy Spirit, the garments are the glory of immortality, the reproach is original sin (taken away in baptism), and the name is “Christian” (Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John 1).
God will glorify the remnant on that day(4:2-6)[[@Bible:Isa 4:2-3]]
2 Once the powerful of Judea have been brought to this low point, the prophet promises that God will also reverse the fortunes of the lowly remnant of Israel. The δέ in 4:2 has no counterpart in Hebrew; this happens almost 40 times in Isaiah (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 130) Ottley called this a “sudden transition” (1904, 1:2:121). ἐπιλάμψει translates the root צמח, which is usually translated by a form of ἀνατέλλω, as in 42:9; 43:19; 44:4; 45:8; 58:8; 61:11. Ottley claimed G read יצח, which is translated by ἔλαμψαν in Lam 4:7, but more likely G read יהיה צמח as a periphrastic future participle: God “will be arising.” The verb ἐπιλάμπω is used in the Greek Bible only here and Wisdom 5:6. Ziegler claimed G considered this a theophany (1934, 107–8). The noun צמח (which also appears in 61:10) carries messianic connotations in Jeremiah 23:5 but G did not bring out such connotations here. For ἐν βουλῇ, G read צבי “beauty, honor” if it were the Aramaic צבו “purpose” from the root צְבָא “desire,” as Ottley noted (1904, 1:2:121) (see Dan 4:17). The neuter passive participle καταλειφθέν translates יתר in Leviticus 6 and 14. Here it translates פליטה, which normally is rendered with a form of σῴζω (but see Isa 37:31); Obadiah and Joel exhibit the highest incidence of the word פליטה . Most of the instances of καταλείπω in the OG are translations of שׁאר, עזב or יתר. The aorist passive participle of καταλείπω appears most often in Isaiah (4:2, 3; 6:12; 7:3, 22; 10:19, 20, 21; 11:11, 16; 24:14; 28:5).
3 The noun τὸ ὑπολειφθέν is a synonym for καταλειφθέν “remnant.” These are those who remain after the removal of Jerusalem’s leaders. Most of the instances of ὑπολείπω in the OG are translations of שׁאר or יתר. This is the only instance of the aorist passive participle of ὑπολείπω in G, but it also occurs in 4 Kingdoms 19:30. The angel in Luke 1:35 alludes to the phrase ἅγιοι κληθήσονται with its διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον κληθήσεται υἱὸς θεοῦ. There is an echo of οἱ γραφέντες εἰς ζωὴν ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ in Luke 10:20 χαίρετε δὲ ὅτι τὰ ὀνόματα ὑμῶν ἐγγέγραπται ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς; Rev 20:12 καὶ βιβλία ἠνοίχθησαν, καὶ ἄλλο βιβλίον ἠνοίχθη, ὅ ἐστιν τῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ἐκρίθησαν οἱ νεκροὶ ἐκ τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τοῖς βιβλίοις κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν; Rev 21:27 καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος εἰ μὴ οἱ γεγραμμένοι ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου.
4 The conjunction ὅτι provides the reason for the situation just described: Lord will burn away injustice. G reverses the tense of the Hebrew qatal form in 4:4 by using ἐκπλυνεῖ, the future of ἐκπλύνω “wash out.” The word for filth,
ῥύπος, is used also in 1 Pet 3:21. The phrase τῶν υἱῶν καί has no counterpart in MT. Q, as well as uncials and editions other than S, lacks a second ἐν, prior to πνεύματι καύσεως. The Hebrew has the preposition ב in both instances. The subject of ἐκκαθαριεῖ (future of ἐκκαθαρίζω) is probably still Κύριος, with τὸ αἷμα as object. Eusebius noted the similarity of imagery to that of 1:15-16 (1.32). Irenaeus said Jesus washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion when he washed the disciples’s feet (Haer. 4.22.1). Clement of Alexandria said it is necessary to wash the soul in the cleansing Word, a spiritual bath, of which prophecy speaks, citing this verse. He explained that the “blood” is crime and the murders of the prophets, and the mode of cleansing is “by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning,” which is not physical cleansing, since it is not with water (Paed. 3.9). Origen, in arguing that the purpose of God’s fury is to cleanse souls, introduced a quotation of 4:4 with “Isaiah, who speaks thus of Israel” (Princ. 2.10.6).
5 MT has ברא, but G read ובא (transposition and waw–resh confusion). Eusebius was aware that “the Hebrew” and the other translations speak of creating rather than coming (1.32), and ignored the reading of the OG. The verb is used impersonally “it will come (to pass)” as in Matt 24:14 “then the end will come” or more exactly Luke 13:35 ἥξει ὅτε. Silva took the verb personally, with the subject Κύριος from verse 4. Eusebius read it as not “it” but “he”: “And who will come, another prophet presents, saying: ‘the Deliverer will come from Zion,’ and he wrote, ‘Yet a little while, the coming one shall come, and shall not tarry.’ After he comes, he will fulfill all that which has been prophesied” (1.32). For ἔσται the Hebrew has יהוה, which G apparently read as יהיה (waw–yod confusion), a confusion that would not happen if the tetragrammaton were written in paleo-Hebrew script. The same misreading also occurs in Isa 8:18; 28:21; cf. Isa 49:1 and 37:18 (Seeligmann 2004, 216–17). This misunderstanding yielded difficulties that G did not resolve by paraphrase. Seeligmann considered על the original reading (preserved in the Mekhilta) for the MT על כל, which G read as simply כל (Seeligmann 2004, 212). As the Greek stands, the subject is unclear, since ἔσται expects two nominatives, one as subject and the other as predicate. One of the nominatives is πᾶς τόπος; the other must be either Σιών or unspecified: “there will be” or “it will be (that).” If one of the nominatives is the predicate, it makes slightly more sense that it be Σιών, as my translation has it “every place of the mountain will be Zion” rather than “Zion will be every place of the mountain.” The clause cannot be construed as “It will come and it will be (that) every place of the mountain of Zion and everything around it [feminine: Zion?] …” because we then encounter the verb σκιάσει and its nominative subject νεφέλη. σκιάσει has no counterpart in Hebrew. Apparently
G added it to resolve some of the syntactic difficulties resulting from his earlier misunderstandings, but was unsuccessful. But a reader might understand σκιάσει not as a verb but as the dative of the noun σκίασις, in which case the only verb is ἔσται, and the two nominatives are πᾶς τόπος τοῦ ὄρους Σιὼν καὶ πάντα τὰ περικύκλῳ αὐτῆς and νεφέλη. Then we could translate, “Every place of the mountain Zion and everything around it will be a cloud for shade…” and this may solve one of the problems regarding the verbs’ subjects in the next verse. Silva has “and as for every site of Mount Sion and all that surrounds it, a cloud will overshadow it,” moving “will be” into the next clause. See the discussion on ἔσται above. Ottley wrote, “As the text stands, however, πᾶς τόπος is probably a casus pendens, filling the place of another object to σκιάσει, and perhaps changed to the nom. by the influence of ἔσται preceding, aided by the general influence of Heb. syntax” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:122) (2.122). The genitives ἡμέρας and νυκτός indicate time, “by day” and “by night.” The phrase ὡς καπνοῦ καὶ ὡς φωτὸς πυρὸς καιομένου is separated from ἡμέρας by the καί, so it modifies νυκτός rather than ἡμέρας. The participle καιομένου modifies πυρός attributively, so the sense is “like (that) of smoke and like (that) of (the) light of burning fire.” B (Swete) lacks ὡς before φωτός, but adds καί before πάσῃ. For σκεπασθήσεται, MT has the noun חפה. We would expect the subject to remain the same as in the preceding verse, whether νεφέλη or πᾶς τόπος. The latter makes more sense as something to be sheltered. The synonymous σκιά and σκέπη frame Isa 4:5-6 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 166); σκιάζω recalls the pillar of cloud from e.g., Num 10:34 (van der Vorm-Croughs 2010, 263). The author of Rev 14:1 possibly had this τοῦ ὄρους Σιών in mind, when he wrote, Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἰδοὺ τὸ ἀρνίον ἑστὸς ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος Σιών. The phrase τὸ ὄρος Σιών (in its various cases) appears elsewhere only in Isa 8:18; 10:12; Joel 3:5; Obad 17; Jer 38:12; Ps 47:12; 132:3.
6 Again the subject of ἔσται should remain the same, but in this case νεφέλη makes more sense as something that will serve as a shade. In the paragraph as a whole we find something sheltering and something being sheltered. It appears most sensible to understand that the “spirit of burning” produces a cloud of smoke that then protects Zion and its environs. The judgement of Zion becomes its salvation. Chrysostom cited 4:6 to show that the “cloud” of witnesses in Hebrews 12:1 is often offered by scripture as a consolation, since it protects “from burning heat, and from storm, and rain” (Hom. Heb. 28.3). Eusebius interpreted the cloud and fire as protection for the church in times of persecution, and illumination (1.32).
The Song of the Vineyard(5:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 5:1-7]]
The oracle commonly called the “Song of the Vineyard,” provides a classic example of parable (with interpretation) and paranomasia in Hebrew. In the parable, the farmer provides everything his vineyard needs, and expects a good crop, yet the vineyard produces bad grapes instead, so the farmer lets the vineyard revert to an uncultivated wasteland. In the interpretation, Lord Sabaoth expects justice and righteousness, but Israel and Judah produce lawlessness and an outcry instead. Their fate is left unstated. The first of the two datives (τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ and τῷ ἀμπελῶνι) indicates to whom the song is sung, the other indicates the topic of the song. Note the difference between ἀγαπητοῦ and the earlier ἠγαπημένῳ.
1 According to BDAG, γίνομαι with the dative in the sense of belonging (as in ἐγενήθη τῷ) is attested around the time of G, in the Petrie Papyri (Mahaffy and Smyly 1891, l. II, 40b, 7) and the Egyptian ostraca (Wilcken 1899, 2:II, 1530, 2f). The Greek word κέρατι even sounds like the Hebrew קרן it translates; here the Hebrew means a hill or peak, as in Arabic, but G translated it as if it were the usual word for a horn. G translated the Hebrew שׁמן literally as πίονι, “fat,” but either he omitted בן or rendered it as ἐν τόπῳ.
2 The singer takes good care of the vineyard by enclosing it with a fence (φραγμόν), planting (φυτεύω) a special vine, building a protective tower, and high hopes of using the vat he dug (ὀρύσσω) for the wine it produces. The word φραγμόν has no counterpart in MT, which simply says “he dug it.” Similarly, περιέθηκα is not represented in MT. The verb χαρακόω means “fence in.” For σωρήχ, B (Swete) has σωρήκ. These are transliterations of שׂרק, which also appears in Jer 2:21 as a kind of vine. The same word appears as a place name in Judges 16:4, where it is similarly transliterated into Greek, perhaps prompting the similar response here, although a similar Hebrew noun is rendered in Isa 16:8 as ἄμπελος. A Hebrew noun from the same root appears in Gen 49:11 (translated as ἕλιξ), and another in Zech 1:8 (as ψαρός). One would expect not χ but κ for Hebrew ק. The noun προλήνιον is related to ληνός “wine-vat” (as the Suda lists them together), but LSJ list only this instance of the word. The agent of τοῦ ποιῆσαι is of course not the subject of ἔμεινα, but the vineyard. The Hebrew קוה conveys expectation; it is translated with μένω in this chapter, its first occurrences in Isaiah, then πείθω (only in Isaiah) and ἐλπίζω (only in Isaiah) and finally ὑπομένω (as is normal in the rest of the poetic books) in the final chapters. The root קוה only appears once in the Pentateuch, at Gen 49:18, where it is rendered περιμένω. The Greek implies that he stayed and waited, rather than
hoped. The noun σταφυλή, a bunch of grapes, appears also in Matt 7:16; Luke 6:44; Rev 14:18. The thorns appear here in the plural form ἄκανθας; compare the variants in verse 6. Justin (Dial. 110) alluded to pruning the vine, but pruning is not mentioned here specifically.
Judge between me and my vineyard(5:3-6)[[@Bible:Isa 5:1-7]]
3 Once the unexpected outcome is described, a response is rhetorically requested from the reader. For ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Ἰούδα καὶ οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ, B (Swete) has the reversed οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἄνθρωπος τοῦ Ἰούδα. The singular ἄνθρωπος matches the Hebrew; the plural οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες does not. The use of ἀνὰ μέσον here is odd; normally in the OG, either ἀνὰ μέσον appears before each of the nouns, (never in Isaiah, but e.g., Mal 3:19 ἀνὰ μέσον δικαίου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον ἀνόμου) or before the first, with a καί before the second (Isa 59:2 ἀνὰ μέσον ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ).
4 The farmer asks what more he could have done. The καί is a literal translation of the Hebrew conjunction, but yields awkward Greek; ὅ is expected instead. Just as in 5:2, the agent of τοῦ ποιῆσαι is not the subject of ἔμεινα, but the vineyard.
5 No answer to the farmer’s questions is needed; he knows what to do. He will remove (ἀφαιρέω) its protection, so that it will be subject to plundering (διαρπαγήν), and it will be an object of trampling (καταπάτημα).
6 The farmer will neglect (ἀνίημι) the vineyard. This same verb is used in 1:14 (where it refers to forgiveness) and 2:9 (abandonment), 3:9 (desertion), and will be again used in 5:24 (absence of control). The prototypical meaning is that bonds are broken. Given the context of tending land, the sense here is that of part 6 of the LSJ entry, “leave untilled” (s.v. ἀνίημι). Muraoka suggested “to leave uncared for” (Muraoka 1993, 39). The neglect is specified by the cessation of two activities conveyed by the aorist passive of two verbs, τέμνω and σκάπτω. The neglect will lead to the growth of thorns, as they are wont to do in an implied land that is χέρσον, dry and barren. The Hebrew has just one negator per verb, with the normal conjunction ו where G has οὐδέ.
The syntax of καὶ ταῖς νεφέλαις ἐντελοῦμαι τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι εἰς αὐτὸν ὑετόν requires some explanation. Because ἐντέλλω takes the dative of the person addressed (ταῖς νεφέλαις), and the the desired task is in the infinitive (τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι), the clouds are being addressed, and the desired result is that the rain (ὑετόν, the accusative agent of the infinitive) not wet εἰς αὐτὸν. It would make little sense for αὐτὸν ὑετόν to together be the object of εἰς.
The interpretation of the vineyard(5:7)[[@Bible:Isa 5:1-7]]
7 Finally the interpretation of the parable is given. The vineyard symbolizes Israel and the vines the people of Judah. The definite article on ἄνθρωπος is absent even though it is expected in order to distinguish the subject from the predicate; the reason for its absence in Greek is its absence in the Hebrew. The expectation of wine corresponds to the expectation of justice and righteousness, but the actual outcome was lawlessness and an outcry. If ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι κρίσιν were on its own, ἔμεινα and ποιῆσαι would be understood to have the same agent (“I waited to do justice”) but in the context of the earlier ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι σταφυλήν (Isa 5:2) and the following third-person ἐποίησεν, it is clear that Lord expected Israel to do justice. With his choice of the words κρίσιν … ἀνομίαν, δικαιοσύνην … κραυγήν, G makes no attempt to recreate the Hebrew paranomasia audible in the words mishpat-mispach, tsedaqa-tseʿaqa.
Greed produces a desert (5:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 5:8-10]]
8 The poetic parabolic style of the Song of the Vineyard comes to an end, but the theme of greed resulting in a deserted land continues. The next oracle begins with an announcement of woe. Of the 22 instances of Οὐαί in Isaiah, most are followed by a nominative/vocative; only seven by the dative. The greedy act taking place is συνάπτοντες, which means joining together. The transitive use of ἐγγίζω is unusual (derived from a literal translation of the hifil of קרב), but LSJ points to some precedents, including this same construction in Gen 48:10, when they “brought” Israel’s sons to him. Here the object of ἐγγίζω cannot be moved, so the meaning must be inferred from the parallel συνάπτοντες and context. Notice the shift to the third person in ἵνα τοῦ πλησίον ἀφέλωνταί τι. The Hebrew reads literally “until the end of a place, and you live” i.e.,
until there is no land left, and the consequence is that you are left by yourself. G adds a motive (to steal from one’s neighbour) and takes the solitude not as an unpleasant natural consequence, but as a prohibition. Here πλησίον is no longer an adjective but an indeclinable adverb, as in Eph 4:25 ἕκαστος μετὰ τοῦ πλησίον αὐτοῦ. Ottley explained the development from the Hebrew as follows: “The verb must be due to LXX. having read אפם, ‘there be none’ as אסף, perhaps אספו, ‘they take away.’ πλησίον might be עד, ‘until,’ read as רע, ‘neighbour’; but if עד was represented by the conjunction, מקום might have been paraphrased, or even read as מקרב, ‘from (one) near’: finally, בקרב, ‘in the midst,’ is omitted, cf. 19:1, 14, &c.; and the interrogative may come from reading ה, sign of the passive causative (Hophal) in that sense” (Ottley 1904, 1:2:125). The aorist subjunctive with μή has a prohibative force. μόνοι is nominative plural adjective in agreement with the plural addressees.
9 James 5:4 quotes εἰς τὰ ὦτα Κυρίου Σαβαώθ without a citation formula. The adjectives in μεγάλαι καὶ καλαί modify the implicit subject of ἔσονται. G adds this verb ἔσονται and the article οἱ before ἐνοικοῦντες, so the most natural way to take the syntax is that the inhabitants will not be in the houses, which makes little sense. The Hebrew is not that difficult here; it lacks the article and the word for “inhabitant” is in the singular: they will be large and good, without inhabitant.
10 The paucity of the harvest is symbolized by the small yield it will produce: one κεράμιον, which is a jar, sometimes used as a measure, but of unspecified volume. In any case, the land worked by ten yoke of oxen (100,000 square cubits would be expected to produce far more (Powell 1992). The ἀρτάβη is a Persian measure of perhaps 50 litres or 29-40 litres (Powell 1992), so G intends about 200-300 litres. Here the Hebrew has a homer, which is 100-200 litres or 75,000 square cubits. μέτρα τρία translates one ephah, which is one tenth of a homer, so 10-20 litres (Powell 1992). The presence of the number indicates that G had a specific volume in mind, but it is not known to us.
Drunkards ignore God’s deeds (5:11-12)[[@Bible:Isa 5:11-12]]
11 The previous woe began in verse 8, directed against the greedy; this woe is directed against drunkards. σίκερα is the transliteration of the Hebrew word שׁכר, with added alpha. The alpha suffixed to transliterated Semitic words is typically taken as an indication of Aramaic influence, and שכרא does appear once in Imperial Aramaic in line 3 of TAD D7.9 from the first quarter of the 5th century BCE. Normally, however, the Aramaic שכר appears without the determinative
alpha. Alpha is also typically affixed to transliterations into Greek of foreign words ending in consonants, to help Greek pronunciation (BDF §141(3)) (cf. ἀλφα, βητα, δελτα, from אלף, בית, דלת, etc.). The precise form of alcoholic beverage is unclear, but its usage clearly indicates that it is intoxicating, and in Isaiah it is always in parallel with wine (Isa 5:11, 22; 24:9; 28:7; 29:9).
12 The partying is contrasted with appreciating Lord’s deeds. The present ἐμβλέπουσιν, matches the present πίνουσιν; however, the Hebrew יביטו is in the yiqtol form, which normally becomes future in Greek. This verb is recalled at the end of the chapter, Isa 5:30. The present κατανοοῦσιν is attested by Q, S corrector ca (cb2 and d), A, and B. But in this case, the Hebrew ראו is the qatal form, which normally becomes aorist in Greek.
Lord’s people captive for lack of knowledge (5:13-17)[[@Bible:Isa 5:13-17]]
13 The initial τοίνυν and the later διὰ τό present the failure to recognize Lord and his deeds as the cause of his people’s hardship. The subject of the singular ἐγενήθη is the people, λαός, so a plural pronoun “they” is used in English. For δίψαν (the reading also of S and A), B has δίψος. The two words mean the same; LSJ suggests δίψος is Attic, and δίψα Ionic, but both forms are used in the OG. The other instances in Isaiah are 41:17; 44:3; 50:2.
14 The image of desiring to consume shifts from the people to Hades, who opens its mouth wide to swallow the violent rich. The verb πλατύνω “opened wide” is attested with ψυχή as its object (see LSJ). The name ᾅδης is the standard rendering of שׁאול. Because of the variety of beliefs about the afterlife at the time of the Greek translation, it is unclear whether ᾅδης was thought to be the home of all the dead, or only the wicked. Josephus indicates there were differences of opinion among the various Jewish sects (Ant. 18.14; J.W. 2.163; 3.375). Similarly, the New Testament attests to various views (even within a single
chapter, Luke 16). The genitive article on the infinitive τοῦ μὴ διαλιπεῖν normally indicates purpose, although it seems out of place that the purpose of opening one’s mouth should be to avoid relenting.
15 Perhaps the reason that no speculation regarding the identity of the ἄνθρωπος and ἀνήρ is evident among early Christian writers is that this man is in parallel with the violent rich of the preceding verse. The adjective μετέωρος usually carries the sense of floating, either superficial or suspended in mid-air.
16 In contrast to the humbling of the arrogant, Lord Sabaoth will be exalted. Eusebius said this prophecy was fulfilled in the time of Vespasian and Hadrian (1.35).
17 Eusebius avoided the grammatical difficulties by commenting on Symmachus’ reading καὶ νεμηθήσονταί ἀμνοὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀπαγωγὴν αὐτῶν, τὰ δὲ ἔρημα τῶν παρανόμων πάροικοι φάγονται instead. We have no such easy solution. The passive βοσκηθήσονται means graze, and διαρπάζω generally means to tear away (LSJ); with people as the object, it more specifically means to abduct (BDAG). The genitive ἀπειλημμένων may be modifying either the ἐρήμους (as those producing the deserted areas) or the ἄρνες (as a partitive genitive). The word order favours the former, but the context favours the latter. If ἀπειλημμένων modifies ἐρήμους, the subjects of these two clauses appear to be incongruous. In the previous clause, those grazing are the people taken captive, but now in this clause, the lambs grazing would be doing so on the land abandoned by the people taken captive (“may lambs feed on the places deserted by those taken away”). The context favours understanding ἀπειλημμένων as a partitive genitive, so that some of the lambs that were taken away feed on the deserted places. Alternatively, the ἄρνες may be understood as the same kind of appositive nominative as νεφέλη in 4:5, which would be translated as: “may they, as lambs, feed on the deserted places.” Eusebius said this prophecy was fulfilled to the letter, when the leaders of the Jews were led into captivity by foreigners (1.35).
Woe to disbelievers (5:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 5:18-19]]
18 Earlier woes began in 5:8 (the greedy) and 5:11 (drunkards); this woe is directed toward skeptics. See the note on οὐαί in Isa 5:8. Second person pronouns are used in the English translation, since the nominative forms are likely
vocatives. This is confirmed by the second person pronoun in Isa 5:22. The verb ἐπισπάω means to forcibly pull something over; it is used to describe removal of circumcision in 1 Cor 7:18. There is no counterpart in MT for ζυγοῦ. The strap ἱμάντι appears again in Isa 5:27; here it is in a genitive construction with a young cow (δάμαλις). The strange order of the words ζυγοῦ ἱμάντι δαμάλεως led Ottley to comment, “Might be taken to mean, ‘a thong of a heifer’s yoke’; but the order of the words suggests that it means ‘a cow-hide chariot-trace,’ ζυγοῦ being, so to speak, the inner, and δαμάλεως the outer genitive” (1904, 1:2:128). Eusebius again recused himself from the difficulty by commenting only on the reading of Symmachus, οὐαὶ οἱ ἕλκοντες τὰς ἀνομίας ὡς σχοινίῳ ματαιότητος καὶ ὡς βρόχῳ τῆς ἁμάξης τὴν ἁμαρτίαν (1.36). For him, the rein of a wagon is what is used to pull in lawlessness.
19 Those who pull in sins ask for evidence of God’s plans; the request must be sarcastic. Eusebius said they only wanted to hear the poetry; they did not want to actually listen to the meaning. The adverbial neuter Τὸ τάχος means “quickly.” For ἴδωμεν (from εἶδον) B (Swete) has εἰδῶμεν (from οἶδα), which by itacism might be spelled the same way. εἰδῶμεν produces a more exact parallel with γνῶμεν. Justin Martyr (in both Dial. 17 and 133) only included one of these verbs; his text reads: Τὸ τάχος αὐτοῦ ἐγγισάτω, καὶ ἐλθέτω ἡ βουλὴ τοῦ ἁγίου Ἰσραὴλ, ἵνα γνῶμεν. Chrysostom appears to have understood the meaning as “see.” The noun βουλή can refer to the capacity to make wise decisions, the activity of deciding, the information used in making a decision, the resulting decision, or an official decision-making group. βουλὴ is a decided plan, often used for the divine will. The patterns in use of βουλή in the LXX differ somewhat from that of earlier Greek literature and inscriptions, notably in two ways: (1) the increased use of βουλή for advice; and (2) the frequent attestation for the capacity to make sound decisions. In the historical books, βουλή usually means advice. In the prophets, it usually refers to plans or schemes. In the wisdom literature, βουλή is commonly something the wise have or provide. Often βουλή signifies the result of deliberation, the object of one’s will, or what one tries to cause, especially in the deuterocanonical literature (11 times). Such plans are the common meaning in Isaiah (17 times) and the other prophets (6 times), but only rarely in the Psalms and wisdom literature (8 times) (Penner 2019).
Woe to those who call evil good(5:20)[[@Bible:Isa 5:20-23]]
20 The woes of 20-23 continue the trend toward brevity. This section contains three of them, condemning those who call evil good, those who think themselves wise,
and those who pervert justice. The double accusatives of λέγοντες are explained in section 4 of the entry in BDAG (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.2). Falsely calling something its opposite is condemned.
Woe to perverters of justice (5:21-23)[[@Bible:Isa 5:20-23]]
21 The expression συνετοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς “wise to yourselves,” is quoted as συνετοὶ ἑαυτοῖς (without ἐν) by Barn. 4.11. ἐπιστήμων is an adjective carrying connotations of expertise. Falsely claiming cleverness is condemned.
22 In Isaiah, ἰσχύω appears most often as a participle, especially in the early chapters, translating a great variety of (twelve) Hebrew words, not all of which can be related to the meaning of strength or power. This observation leads to the supposition that ἰσχύοντες is a favourite word of G, used when he is uncertain what the Hebrew means. The participle functions as an a stative adjective “strong,” rather than active participle “able.”
23 The noun δώρων often means “bribe.” The verb αἴρω can often have the meaning “kill,” but here there is an impersonal object. Giving false rulings is condemned.
Injustice provokes Lord’s wrath (5:24-25)[[@Bible:Isa 5:24-25]]
24 The section beginning in 5:24 is linked to what precedes by the phrase διὰ τοῦτο, which presents Lord’s wrath that follows as the consequence of the dishonesty that preceded. In this case, the false behaviours of the influential will result in the provocation of the Holy One of Israel. The expression ὃν τρόπον “in the way in which,” common in the OG to translate כ, is attested in Xenophon, Plato, Josephus, etc. In the OG, it appears in no book more than Isaiah (25 times, 20 of which are in proto-Isaiah), but Joshua, Ezekiel, and Deuteronomy are also fond of it. The future καυθήσεται is used here for timeless action, even though MT has the qatal form. The sense of ἀνίημι in the phrase φλογὸς ἀνειμένης is unrestrained, as we might say in English, “with abandon.” LEH has a separate definition for this instance: “violent flame.” (Johan Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie 2008, s.v. ἀνίημι) χνοῦς and κονιορτός may both be translated dust, but χνοῦς tends to be organic (chaff), and κονιορτός road dust. Usually the object of θέλω is an infinitive verb. LSJ say that it is “not used c. acc. only, exc. when an inf. is easily supplied” (LSJ s.v. θέλω); here the object is a noun. The verb παροξύνω “arouse” is the usual translation of נאץ “disdain.”
25 Instead of ἐθυμώθη ὀργῇ as in Q and the other uncials and editions, Sinaiticus has ὀργίσθη θυμῷ. Both verbs appear in the OG and G in comparable numbers, translating חרה, and both nouns in comparable numbers, translating אף, but Isaiah prefers the noun θυμός and the verb ὀργίζω. For ἐπί (the reading also of S and B), A has εἰς. ἐπί is a better rendering of על in hostile sense, as in 1:1. Q, A, and B have the indicative παρωξύνθη instead of the aorist passive subjunctive παροξύνθῃ attested in S. The same word appears at the end of 5:24. As indicative, the sense is, “And the mountains were provoked, and their carcasses became like filth in the middle of the path,” which still is puzzling, but less awkward syntactically. Silva has “the mountains were provoked, and their carcasses became like dung in the middle of the road” (Silva 2007). Ottley has “and the mountains were provoked (to anger), and their carcases became as dung in the midst of the way” (Ottley 1904). The adjective θνησιμαῖος “dead” is first attested in the LXX, in Leviticus 5:2; 7:14; 17:15. The noun κοπρία refers to a manure-pile (compare κόπρος “manure” in Ex 29:14). Regarding B’s addition of αὐτοῦ after θυμός “passion,” see the note at beginning of this verse. The possessive pronoun “his” is present in Hebrew behind ὁ θυμός … ἡ χεὶρ, but is absent in G.
An army from the nations (5:26-30)[[@Bible:Isa 5:26-30]]
26 The relation between the two sections is specified by the particle τοιγαροῦν, which is another compound particle, very rare in translation Greek (appearing twice in Job and twice in Proverbs). Here (as in Prov 1:31 and Job 24:22) it translates the simple Hebrew conjunction ו. It indicates that what follows is the consequence of what precedes: because Lord Sabaoth’s hand is still raised, he will raise an army from the nations. Ron Troxel explained that the differences between the Hebrew and Greek in Isa 5:26-30 are not all the product of a theological agenda. In particular, singular verbs and pronouns were rendered as collectives, except in 5:29b-30, where singulars are used for God (Troxel 1993).
The first thing Lord Sabaoth raises is a sign (σύσσημον). Its location is indicated by the adverb μακράν, which was historically a feminine accusative adjective modifying an implicit ὁδόν. The adverb κούφως is congnate with the adjective κοῦφος, meaning light, nimble, quick, or easy, a good translation for קל.
27 This army does not suffer from normal human limitations; they will not hunger (future of πεινάω), or get tired due to exhaustion (future of κοπιάω),
or become drowsy (future of νυστάζω). Wheras ῥήγνυμι refers to a violent breaking, burst, παράγω means to pass by. Breaking certainly fits the context better than passing by, since the preceding clauses describe the endurance of the summoned army. The translation “would” reflects the single subjunctive after a series of futures translated “will,” because of the emphatic negative construction οὐ μή + subjunctive. The same word ἱμάντες is used earlier in this chapter at 5:18, to refer to the straps of the heifer.
28 This army is ready for battle. Their bows described using the perfect participle of ἐντείνω, “stretched.” Although it seems odd for horses hooves to be “reckoned” (ἐλογίσθησαν), that Greek rendering is simply a literal translation of נחשׁבו “reckoned.” In place of τροχοὶ τῶν ἁρμάτων αὐτῶν, MT has only וגלגליו “and their wheels,” with nothing but context to prompt the addition of τῶν ἁρμάτων. These wheels are compared to a καταιγίς “squall,” which translates סוּפָה “storm-wind.”
29 The fierceness of the army is conveyed by wild animal similes. The verb ὁρμάω connotes impulsive rushing. The reading of Vaticanus, ὀργιῶσιν, could be the present of ὀργιάω “celebrate” or the future of ὀργίζω “make angry.” The subject then changes from plural to singular. The subject of the singular verb ἐπιλήμψεται is probably is the same as that of the singular verbs in Isa 5:26. Rahlfs and Ziegler disagree about the reading βοήσει. Rahlfs follows B and S, but Ziegler follows Q and A’s βοήσεται (also in 5:30). The future is attested in both middle and active forms, but the active is considered to be a later form, becoming popular beginning in the 3rd C. BCE (LSJ s.v. βοάω).
30 The roaring extends the wild animal similes from verse 29, and the effect on the prey is to look around for an escape. The same verb as ἐμβλέψονται (5:30) appeared earlier in the chapter, where the drunkards were not considering the works of God (Isa 5:12). It is not always clear in G whether γῆ refers to the local “land” or the “earth” in contrast to the sky, but here it is the earth. However, there is no escape for them there; ἀπορία refers to a undesirable condition from which no escape seems possible.
Theophany(6:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 6:1-5]]
1 This passage is one of the most famous in Isaiah. It recounts Isaiah’s call, providing hints as to the prophet’s identity and mission. It includes a rare description of supernatural beings, of ritual objects and practice. It notably includes the paradoxical commission regarding his audience perceiving and not perceiving. The verses most commonly commented on by the early fathers were those quoted already in the New Testament. These are 6:3 (the trisagion, quoted in Rev 4:8) and 6:9-10 (quoted in Matt 13:14-15; Mark 4:12; John 12:40). Often this latter passage is cited together with the “myriads” of Daniel 7:10. The narrative is introduced by a statement establishing the time at which the events happened. Καὶ ἐγένετο lacks a Hebrew counterpart. It appears seven times in Isaiah, but only here does it not translate ויהי. The genitive τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ indicates the time during which the encounter took place. Methodius Simeon and Anna 1 interpreted “Uzziah” of 6:1 as representative of the apostates, the ungrateful synagogue. The location and the identity of the speaker are not specified. The reader is left to infer that because the preceding “vision” was of Isaiah son of Amos, the same Isaiah is the first-person narrator here. The location is also left to be inferred on the basis of the physical objects mentioned: a throne, and a building. Although τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ could conceivably modify ὁ οἶκος (“the house of his glory was full”), the adjective πλήρης expects a genitive complement, so “the house was full of his glory,” much like Isa 5:3, πλήρης πᾶσα ἡ γῆ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ. Theodoret expressed some concern about how Isaiah could have “seen” God, since God is invisible and unlimited (Dialogues 1 and 2). Irenaeus (Haer. 4.20.8) said what Isaiah saw must have been Jesus, who had a visible form. The “glory” that Isaiah saw was also interpreted as Jesus by Irenaeus (Haer. 4.33.11). Likewise, Methodius read this vision as a prophecy of the incarnation, Jesus at his birth. The throne is the virgin, and the whole earth is full of his “glory,” Jesus. This interpretation likely derives from John 12:41. Methodius also saw Jesus’ mother in “the tongs of that cleansing coal.”
2 The presence of serapheim removes any doubt that this is an extraordinary sight; one does not normally see such creatures. The pluperfect εἱστήκεισαν is used for the intransitive simple past (BDAG s.v. ἵστημι C.). G has τῷ ἑνί twice, where the Hebrew idiom has לאחד only the second time. Μέν sets up the first element of what normally is a pair, but here is a triplet of phrases, all beginning καὶ ταῖς δυσίν. Imperfects are extremely rare in G. Besides the forms of εἰμί, there are only four imperfects in G, three of which are in this paragraph (the other is ἔφερον in 30:6). By contrast, Ezekiel has dozens of imperfects. The Hebrew form behind κατεκάλυπτον is yiqtol. The significance of G’s
use of imperfect is twofold: (1) G thought the yiqtol forms here conveyed imperfective aspect; (2) G did not think the yiqtol forms regularly conveyed imperfective aspect.
3 The serapheim’s constant activities (expressed with imperfect verbs) are covering (hands and feet), flying, shouting, and saying the trisagion. For ἐκέκραγον (with S and A), B (Swete) has the singular ἐκέκραγεν. A reader might mistake ἐκέκραγον for a second aorist. It is not pluperfect because the ending is not -σαν. The aorist active principal part is normally ἐκέκραξα, with the imperative κέκραξον. The perfect is κέκραγα, with infinitive κεκραγέναι The Hebrew form here is qatal. Muraoka called it an imperfect (parallel to the other tenses in this context), but possible aorist, citing Thackeray, who said, “the aor. takes 3 (or 4) forms, the third only being classical: (i) usually ἐκέκραξα, (ii) ἔκραξα rarely and in books using pres. κράζω, but always ἀνέκραξα, (iii) ἀνέκραγον, (iv) possibly redupl. 2nd aor. ἐκέκραγον, unless this should be regarded as impf. from κεκράγω, §§21,1; 19,1” (Thackeray 1978, sec. 24). Ottley wrote, “The LXX. use many reduplicated forms of this verb, Numb. xi. 2, Job vi. 5, and frequently, esp. in the Psalms, as xxxiv. 6, 17, lv. 16, lvii. 3. Lightfoot, on Clem. Rom. Ep. Cor. i. 34, where this passage is quoted, treats ἐκέγραγον as the imperf. of a new verb κεγράγω, formed from κέκραγα” (Ottley 1904, 1:2.133). See also the note on κεκραγέτωσαν at 14:31. The phrasing of ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον mimics the Hebrew expression זה אל זה, but is not entirely a literal rendering, which would be οὗτος πρὸς τοῦτον. The forms here imply the seraphs are masculine. In 6:6 they are neuter. Rev 4:8 alludes to Isa 6:3: καὶ τὰ τέσσερα ζῷα, ἓν καθʼ ἓν αὐτῶν ἔχων ἀνὰ πτέρυγας ἕξ, κυκλόθεν καὶ ἔσωθεν γέμουσιν ὀφθαλμῶν, καὶ ἀνάπαυσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς λέγοντες: ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος. 1 Clement 34:6 quotes 6:3, omitting one phrase, ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον καὶ ἔλεγον, and changing the word γῆ to κτίσις, as follows: καὶ ἐκέκραγον· Ἅγιος, ἄγιος, ἄγιος Κύριος Σαβαώθ, πλήρης πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ. The seraphim were taken as evidence of the Trinity, the two seraphim being the Son and Spirit (Origen, Princ. 1.3.4). The early interpreters commonly cited Habakkuk 3:2 in conjunction with Isa 6:3.
4 In the beginning of the narrative, the house was full of God’s glory; in 6:4 it is full of sound and smoke. ἐπήρθη is the aorist passive of ἐπαίρω. ὑπέρθυρον, literally “over door” is the lintel. See the note on 6:3 regarding the form of ἐκέκραγον.
I have impure lips(6:5)[[@Bible:Isa 6:6-7]]
5 The narrator expresses his dismay at this experience because purity has encountered impurity. Τάλας translates אוי only here. In fact, only here is τάλας
a translation of Hebrew; the other three instances in the Greek Bible are in Wisdom and 4 Maccabees. Κατανύω means bring to an end; κατανύσσω means pierce, usually not physically. The Hebrew דמה could mean “silenced” or “destroyed.” The participles ὢν and ἔχων could have a concessive sense “although I am … and have …” but Silva leaves the meaning of the participle ambiguous, translating “for being a man and having unclean lips, I live among a people having unclean lips” (Silva 2007). Similarly, Ottley has “for being (but) a man, and with impure lips, I dwell in the midst of a people with impure lips” (Ottley 1904). There is an article on the word for king, but none on the word for Lord, indicating again that Κύριος is more of a name than a title (see the Introduction).
Lips purified(6:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 6:6-7]]
6 The response to the volatile situation when pure encounters impure is the gracious purification of the impure. The identity of the agent sending the saraph is not indicated. ἀπεστάλη is the aorist passive of ἀποστέλλω. The neuter ἕν is in contrast to Isa 6:3, where the seraphs were masculine. The two words λαβίδι ἔλαβεν are both derived from the root *λαβ, just as the Hebrew words behind them both derive from לקח.
7 The impurity that required removal consists of transgressions. In the first instance of ἥψατο, the subject appears to be the seraph (which is the subject of the preceding and following verbs). In the second instance, the subject is clearly the coal. Following the Hebrew closely, the coal is said to touch not the lips but the mouth. ἀφελεῖ is the future of ἀφαιρέω, and περικαθαριεῖ is the future of περικαθαρίζω.
Whom shall I send?(6:8)[[@Bible:Isa 6:8-10]]
8 After Isaiah is purified, the Lord seeks an ambassador, and the narrator volunteers. The translation “here I am” is idiomatic English for the response to the question “whom shall I send.” G has no word corresponding to “here,” and it could be translated “I am the one” just as well.
Isaiah’s commission(6:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 6:8-10]]
9 The Lord then commissions the narrator with a message for “this” people. The context around εἶπον demands that it be read as an imperative. The
accentuation agrees with Ziegler, but Swete and Rahlfs have εἰπὸν. On the question of the accent, LSJ refers to Herodianus Grammaticus 1.460. συνῆτε is from συνίημι. A noun in the dative and a future verb Ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε translate one Hebrew infinitive absolute construction, but another is rendered by a participle (βλέποντες) which is the most common way of translating the infinitive absolute. The relationship of the various clauses in this sentence has been much discussed (New 1991; Evans 1982b; 1982a; 1983; Karrer 2000; Menken 1988). The first two are not very controversial (Καὶ εἶπεν and Πορεύθητι καὶ εἶπον τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ), aside from the discussion on Isa 6:9 above. But the relationship between the next three parts of the sentence needs clarification. First are two future indicatives with matching doubly negated subjunctives, then introduced by γάρ are three aorist indicatives, and finally introduced by μήποτε are four subjunctives and a future. The function of γάρ is to provide the reason for something, the cause for the effect that has just been stated. In this case, the cause is the insensitivity of the people’s faculties of perception and the effect is the lack of understanding. It is unspecified whether the explanatory clause introduced by γάρ is addressed to the people, to prophet, or to the reader, but the parallel between 6:9’s τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ and 6:10’s τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου indicates that the same participants are intended in both: God is addressing the prophet.
10 The verb ἐπαχύνθη (from παχύνω) is a literal rendering of השׁמן “fatten,” but MT has an active rather than passive form. Καμμύω and καταμύω mean close the eyes. Συνῶσιν is the subjunctive of συνίημι, the same verb as in 6:9. Isa 6:9-10 is quoted multiple times in the New Testament. John 12:40 has τετύφλωκεν αὐτῶν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ ἐπώρωσεν αὐτῶν τὴν καρδίαν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ νοήσωσιν τῇ καρδίᾳ καὶ στραφῶσιν καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Mark 4:12 has ἵνα βλέποντες βλέπωσιν καὶ μὴ ἴδωσιν, καὶ ἀκούοντες ἀκούωσιν καὶ μὴ συνιῶσιν, μήποτε ἐπιστρέψωσιν καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς. Matt 13:14-15 has ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε καὶ οὐ μὴ συνῆτε, καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε καὶ οὐ μὴ ἴδητε. ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν βαρέως ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν ἐκάμμυσαν, μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς
καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσιν καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν καὶ ἐπιστρέψωσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Acts 28:26-27 has πορεύθητι πρὸς τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον καὶ εἰπόν: ἀκοῇ ἀκούσετε καὶ οὐ μὴ συνῆτε, καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε καὶ οὐ μὴ ἴδητε: ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν βαρέως ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν ἐκάμμυσαν: μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσιν καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσιν καὶ ἐπιστρέψωσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς. Note that in Matthew the only difference is the lack of αὐτῶν in ὠσὶν βαρέως, and Matthew agrees with the other NT citations in this regard. Typically, readers understood this passage as a prediction of rejection (Acts 28:26–27; Justin, Dial. 12; Sib. Or. 1.360; Cyprian, Test. 1.3) or God’s intentional obfuscation (Matt 13:14-15; Irenaeus, Haer. 4.29.1; Tertullian, Jejun. 6). Eusebius is our primary witness to that understanding. He said the Jews that saw Jesus were not responsive, but disbelieved. καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐκάμμυσαν, εἰπών· μήποτε ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς (Ziegler 1975, para. 1.42) They shut their eyes so that they would not see. Anti-Jewish interpretations also arise from 6:9 in Tertullian, On Modesty 8; Origen, Against Celsus 2.8; Tertullian, Test. 1.3. The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles (3.6) interpret 6:9-10 as referring to women, who should not be teachers because they do not understand. Justin Martyr (Dial. 12) attributed 6:9-10 to Jeremiah, and so did Chrysostom (Homily 14, on Romans 8:27). Tertullian appealed to 6:9 to promote fasting as a way for one’s heart to avoid “fat” (Jejun. 6).
The most common function of μήποτε is to convey apprehension, introducing the undesirable consequence. In this sense it is normally followed by an aorist subjunctive, as we have here. The reason Isaiah should speak is because Lord wants to prevent the people from seeing and hearing and turning and being healed. A much less frequent use of μήποτε is to conjecture something, as in Job 1:5 Μήποτε οἱ υἱοί μου ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ αὐτῶν κακὰ ἐνενόησαν “perhaps my children have thought evil in their minds.” Muraoka also points to Gen 43:12 and Judges 3:24 with this sense (2009, s.v. μήποτε 5.), but in this use, it is followed by an indicative clause. The four subjunctives then should be understood as undesirable consequences, but it is unclear whether the future ἰάσομαι is directly parallel to them. If ἰάσομαι is also governed by μήποτε, the healing is a possibility. But if ἰάσομαι is an independent clause, then Lord will heal them unconditionally. G likely used καί + future simply because that is the standard translation of a waw-prefixed qatal form like ורפא. However, the purpose of this commentary is to present not the intention of the translator but the understanding of a reader of Q. As Ottley noted, G implied the responsibility for the insensitivity falls on the people themselves.
11 The prophet asks to know the extent of this fate, and the response is drastic: until there are no ἄνθρωποι in the land.
The extent of the desolation(6:11-13)[[@Bible:Isa 6:11-13]]
11 The preposition παρά with the infinitive is not uncommon in Greek, to give the reason for something “because” or “for” (see Josephus Ant. 7.195; J.W. 2.182; 1 Clem. 39.5). The most obvious interpretation of the ἄνθρωποι is that the land would be depopulated, but van der Kooij interpreted the “men” to be removed from the land as the foreign occupiers (van der Kooij 2012). καταλειφθήσεται (future of καταλείπω) translates a yiqtol form, apparently reading תשׁאר for תשׁאה, the verb behind ἐρημωθῶσιν in this verse. That earlier subjunctive translated a qatal שׁאו. Because ἔρημος does not have an article, it is not functioning as an attribute (i.e., “a deserted land will be left behind”). Irenaeus considered the time for the fulfilment of 6:11 to be the future. He argued against allegorizing: “If, however, any shall endeavour to allegorize [prophecies] of this kind, they shall not be found consistent with themselves in all points” (Haer. 5.34.2). He continued, “For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist.”
12 Because God is referred to in the third person, the clause beginning with μετὰ ταῦτα is evidently no longer spoken by Lord but must be the words of the narrator or editor. The words μετὰ ταῦτα are not represented in MT. The citations in LSJ’s entry on μακρύνω are almost all from the Greek Bible, but the sense is clear from the etymology and GELS that distance between two things is increased. The same verb καταλειφθέντες appeared in the previous verse, but here it translates עזב.
13 Emerton has a thorough summary of ancient interpretations of Isa 6:13, including the Greek (1982b, 212–13). The accent of ἐστιν follows B (Swete; Ziegler has ἐστι); Rahlfs has ἔστιν. According to Carson (1985, 50), the accent should only be on the penult when it stands at the beginning of a sentence or clause; when signifying existence or possibility; when it is preceded by οὐκ, μή, ὡς, εἰ, καί, ἀλλά (or ἀλλ’), τοῦτο (when elided as τοῦτ’); when it is strongly emphatic. The Hebrew clause has no verb, so that is probably why the Greek present tense was used, since the present tense is the most versatile tense of εἰμί. In this context, however, the present tense ἐστιν is surprising. Van der Kooij claimed it is in the present tense because the “tenth” is to be present constantly, in contrast to the the population, which will grow (according to Isa 6:12b). In this interpretation, the “tenth” is not ten percent of the population, but the tithe. ἐπιδέκατον is a financial term for 10%. Van der Kooij referred to Jubilees
32:2, where Jacob tithes his sons, to argue that this “tithe” is Levi (van der Kooij 2012, 73). Forms of היה ל meaning “become” are often translated literally as forms of εἰμί εἰς. Emerton suggested προνομή refers not to plunder (contra Ottley 1904), but animal fodder. For ἀπὸ, with S and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), B (Swete) has ἐκ; Emerton suggested the Hebrew had מן here. The word θήκη is used for containers, especially graves and sheaths (for swords). Muraoka suggested, “the ground in which the roots of a tree lie (?) or a husk of acorns” (2009, s.v. θήκη). In Isa 3:26 the ornament cases, αἱ θῆκαι τοῦ κόσμου of the women were mentioned. Emerton translated, “and like an acorn when it falls from its cup.” Arie van der Kooij saw in Isa 6:13 a strong interest in the priesthood, in that that an acorn falling from its husk refers to the loss of a position of power by the descendents of the tithed son Levi, and the imagery of plunder indicates that this loss took place violently (van der Kooij 2012).
Aram attacks Jerusalem(7:1)[[@Bible:Isa 7:1-2]]
1 The seventh chapter of Greek Isaiah is the one that generates the most discussion, even more than chapter 53. Almost all the attention is directed to Isa 7:14 and its application to the birth of Jesus. Eusebius said this extended prophecy presents “the divinity of the only begotten son” (1.43). This Christological use makes it easy to miss the intention of the prophecy, which is to encourage Ahaz to put his trust in Lord. There is no υἱοῦ to describe τοῦ Ἰωαθὰμ, as there is with Ὀζείου. Although both Rhaasson and Phakee went up, ἀνέβη is singular; ἠδυνήθησαν is plural.
Aram joined with Ephraim(7:2)[[@Bible:Isa 7:1-2]]
2 The agent of the passive ἀνηγγέλη (who did the reporting) is not specified. The preposition εἰς is unusual with ἀναγγέλλω. Twice (also in 7:13) Achaz is addressed as οἶκος Δαυείδ; Eusebius said those under Achaz were called the “house of David”: οὕτω δὲ ἐκαλοῦντο οἱ ἀπὸ γένους ∆αυὶδ καὶ πάντες οἱ ἐκ διαδοχῆς αὐτοῦ ἄρχοντες καὶ ἀρχόμενοι (1.43). For λέγοντες with A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), S and B (Swete) have λέγων. The Hebrew rule is that direct speech should be introduced by a form of אמר. Etymologically συμφωνέω implies harmony, but the verb is used mainly metaphorically to indicate agreement. Despite the two subjects, both of which are ψυχὴ, ἐξέστη is singular; Eusebius retained the singular “their soul was confounded” (1.43). The identity of αὐτοῦ is not specified; the most recent antecedent would be οἶκος Δαυεὶδ, and that is how Eusebius took it, but it is also grammatically possible that if the quotation does not end after Ephraim but extends to the end of the verse, αὐτοῦ could refer to Aram or Ephraim. See the comment on ὃν τρόπον in 5:24.
Lord instructs Isaiah to encourage Achaz(7:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
3 The first part of the Hebrew name שׁאר ישׁוב is translated (καταλειφθείς); the second is transliterated (Ἰασούβ). If the article in the phrase ὁ καταλειφθεὶς Ἰασούβ belongs with the proper name, then the translation would be “your remaining son Iasoub,” but it is simpler to take it as Silva did, so that article makes the participle substantive. It is not clear why this son should be designated as remaining; in contrast to whom?
4 The form φύλαξαι looks the same as an infinitive but in this context must be an aorist middle imperative. When followed by a infinitive verb (especially a genitive as in Jos 23:11), it means to be careful to do that verb. ξύλων “timbers” (also in Isa 7:2) and δαλῶν “fire-brands” are both nouns; the main noun is indicated by the δύο, so the other genitive δαλῶν is specifying what kind of timbers. “Once” is used in the translation rather than “when” for ὅταν because γένηται is aorist rather than present. The healing is not contemporaneous with but subsequent to the anger. ὀργή and θυμός appear in 482 verses of the OG in total; 45 of these are in Isaiah. That the two are synonymous in Isaiah is evident from the parallelism of Isa 34:2. In 12 verses in Isaiah, the two both appear. They are joined by a conjunction in 10:5, 25; 13:9; 30:30; 34:2; they are in a genitive relationship in 7:4; 30:27; 42:25 as ὀργὴ (τοῦ) θυμοῦ; and in 9:18; 13:13 as θυμὸν ὀργῆς. The Hebrew words behind θυμός are usually אַף (14 times), and חֵמָה (6 times). Behind ὀργή are usually זַ֫עַם (4 times) and אַף (2 times). When G saw either אַף or חֵמָה or עֶבְרָה his reflex was usually θυμός; only זַ֫עַם prompted him to think of ὀργή instead.
Aram plotted evil(7:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
5 The nominative ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Ἀρὰμ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Ῥομελίου does not have a verb for which it can act as a subject. The sentence lacks a main verb, since ἐβουλεύσαντο is in the ὅτι clause.
6 Swete spelled συλλαλήσαντες, which Q has in agreement with S, A, Bb (Rahlfs, Ziegler), as συνλαλήσαντες. The participle could indicate the sequence or the means by which the action of ἀποστρέψωμεν happens. Instead of the subjunctive ἀποστρέψωμεν in agreement with A (Ziegler), S and B (Swete, Rahlfs) have the future ἀποστρέψομεν. Note this is one of the few places where Rahlfs and Ziegler differ. The future tense would match the preceding Ἀναβησόμεθα and the following βασιλεύσομεν better. The basic function of the accusative is to limit or modify verbs, so τὸν υἱὸν Ταβεήλ expresses how they will rule.
Aram’s plot will fail(7:7-9)[[@Bible:Isa 7:7-9]]
7 The future ἔσται is a literal translation of תהיה, although γενήσεται would be better Greek.
8 The prepositional phrase ἀπὸ λαοῦ is a literal translation of מעם, which means “without a people.” ἐκλείπω denotes diminishing to the point of nonexistence, for which no one English word suffices.
9 Menzies argued that the reading of Isa 7:9b represented by MT, Vg, Symmachus, Theodotion, and Tg. Jon. “if you will not believe, then you will not be established” was corrupted by a scribe’s minor mechanical error compounded by a second scribe’s brilliant but mistaken conjectural emendation, to produce the reading of the LXX, Peshitta, and VL “If you will not believe, then you will not understand” (Menzies 1998). Menzies commented as follows: “It is likely that if 1QIsa reflects a corrupted text, it was corrupted from a form of the verb אמן rather than a form of the verb בין since תאמינו differs from the MT’s תאמנו by only a single consonant. This corruption should probably be attributed to an accidental insertion of a stray yod, perhaps by a fatigued copyist, and perhaps in unconscious imitation of the hiphil form of the word which appears earlier in the verse. At this point the meaning of the text became obscured. This first error was compounded when a later copyist, who recognized that there was a problem with the text of his Vorlage (1QIsa or a relative), attempted to correct the problem by emendation. This copyist substituted תבינו for (the second) תאמינו” (Menzies 1998, 126). Pancratius Beentjes argued that the Chronicler downplayed the prophet Isaiah in 2 Chronicles 29-32 in comparison to 2 Kings 18-20. Specifically, 2 Chr 20:20 transforms the prophetic warning of Isa 7:9b into a “positive summons” by King Jehosaphat that epitomizes the Chronicler’s message (Beentjes 2010).
A sign for Achaz(7:10-12)[[@Bible:Isa 7:10-17]]
10 Καὶ προσέθετο is a standard translation of ויוסף.
11 There is no word in MT prompting the εἰς before βάθος, but the Hebrew ל of the הגבה למעלה lies behind the εἰς before ὕψος. The sign beneath the earth and to the height above was interpreted by Irenaeus to be Christ seeking the perished sheep and ascending to his Father (Haer. 3.19.3). Irenaeus devoted an entire chapter to this prophecy (Haer. 3.21). Eusebius claimed the depths are the same as Hades (1.44).
12 The verbs αἰτήσω and πειράσω could be either futures or subjunctives.
Lord will provide the sign(7:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
13 Here the addressee is called οἶκος Δαυείδ, who might appear to be Achaz himself since no others are mentioned in attendance besides Achaz, Isaiah, and Iasoub, but the verb Ἀκούσατε and pronoun ὑμῖν are plural. Eusebius identified this house of David as the descendents of David, in agreement with his interpretation of the phrase in Isa 7:3. The question introduced by μή expects a negative answer. “It isn’t a small thing, is it?”
The maiden will bear Emmanouel(7:14-16)[[@Bible:Isa 7:3-6]]
14 Because ἕξει is a durative verb, it appears to refer to pregnancy, whereas λήμψεται refers to conception. Matt 1:23 has ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον μεθʼ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός. The only difference is the third person plural καλέσουσιν for the second person plural καλέσετε. A, B (Swete, Rahlfs, Ziegler) have καλέσεις, and so do D, Origen, and Eusebius, but S reads καλέσει. In Q, Achaz and those with him will name the child; in A and B, it will be Achaz alone; in S, the maiden will name the him. When quoted by Luke, the form of the verb is second person singular, as in A and B, but the subject is the maiden, as in S. Luke 1:31 has καὶ ἰδοὺ συλλήμψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ καὶ τέξῃ υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. Dozens of articles have addressed Greek Isaiah 7:14 specifically (C. H. Gordon 1953; das Neves 1972; Dubarle 1978; Cazelles 1986; Kamesar 1990; Rösel 1991; Heath 1994; Troxel 2003; J. Lust 2004; de Sousa 2008), and Lincoln provides the most recent review of the issues (Lincoln 2012). Much of the discussion over Isa 7:14 has to do with whether certain translations are justifiable. Is παρθένος a reasonable translation of העלמה? Yes, Gen 24:43 provides a precedent. Is “virgin” a reasonable translation of παρθένος? Yes, Rev 14:4 associates παρθένος with sexual inexperience. But although these translations are reasonable, there is reason to think that sexual inexperience is not the prototypical characteristic of a παρθένος, even in G’s mind. Lincoln adduced many examples of παρθένος with the more general meaning of a woman who has not yet borne a child: Pausanias 8.20.4; Diodorus Siculus 20.84.3; Lycophron, Alexandra 1141, 1175; Sophocles, Oedipus Rex 1462, and most clearly Sophocles, Women of Trachis 1216-29, “where the dying Heracles implores his son to marry a παρθένος who has already been his own lover” (Lincoln 2012, 215). Similarly the LXX has non-virginal uses of the word in Gen. 34:3 and Joel 1:8, and even in Isa 62:5 we encounter the phrase συνοικῶν νεανίσκος παρθένῳ, where the cohabitation (notably in the present tense) implies that not sexual inexperience but age appears to be what G had in mind, since παρθένος is the female counterpart of νεανίσκος. Michaël N. van der Meer noted Rösel’s argument that עלמה rendered as παρθένος echoes the birth of Aion as reported
by Hippolytus. Pursuing this possibility that the Greek translator was influenced by Hellenistic mystery cults, van der Meer detected parallels between Greek Isaiah 7:14-17 and Greek Egyptian prophecies close in time and space to where and when Isaiah was translated into Greek. Specifically, certain phrases and images are shared between Greek Isaiah and The Dream of Nectanebo, The Oracle of the Lamb of Bokchoris and the Oracle of the Potter, and The Oracles of Ḥor. In common with the Dream of Nectanebo, Isa 6 stresses verticality (high; lintels raised). According to one possible reading, the Lamb oracle mentions a city called “a bundle of cucumbers and gourds,” reminiscent of the city razed like a cucumber field in Isa 1:8. The Potter oracle shares a topic and the word ἀνεμόφθορον with Isa 19:17, a general theme of self-destruction with Isa 19:2, the word ἀγάλματα with Isa 19:3, and most importantly, a common enemy: the Syrian king. Assuming Isa 14:4-21 and Isa 22:1-14 allude to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, van der Meer saw another parallel between the Egyptian oracle and Greek Isaiah: they both contemporize oracles of doom originally about Assyria to this Seleucid king. The Ḥor oracle contains a line, “The confirmation of this: the Queen bears a male child.” The queen must have been Cleopatra II, who would have given birth to this male child Ptolemy Eupator while she was a teenager. As in Isa 7:14, the birth of a male heir by a young mother while threatened by Syria served as a confirmation of the prophecy (van der Meer 2010). Van der Meer was right to admit these parallels do not indicate literary dependence. In most of the cases raised, the parallels (such as between Ḥor and Isa 7) are already present in the Hebrew. The few lexical parallels that are specifically Greek are not at all strong. The allegedly significant historical-cultural parallel exalting Memphis over the other cities is due (as van der Meer noted) to the translator’s misunderstanding of נשאו in Isa 19:13. Even the claim that the reception history of both the Egyptian oracles and Isaiah (evidenced by its Greek translation) both exemplify fulfilment interpretation regarding the Seleucid period (specifically Leontopolis around 140 BCE) assumes such an interpretive method is characteristic of the translator of Greek Isaiah. Christian interpreters since the Gospels have seen here a reference to Jesus’ birth. Even if sexual inexperience were the only meaning of παρθένος, G indicates that the mother was a virgin only at the time of the prophecy, not at the time of the birth. Lincoln demonstrates that Matthew’s account does not imply the conception took place without a male human, but only that the father was not Joseph. Usually the fathers quoted 7:14 to show that the scriptures prophesied the miraculous birth of Christ, but also to show that the Son had a physical body (Ignatius, Philippians 3). Justin Martyr bore witness to the Jewish interpretation that the prophecy referred to Hezekiah (Dial. 43 and 67). In response, Justin (Dial. 43, 48, 66, 67–71, 77f., 84) insisted that without a miraculous birth
there would be no “sign,” and therefore the mother must have been a virgin after a miraculous conception. Since Ἐμμανουήλ is given as a name, it is transliterated rather than translated.
15 The original reading of Sinaiticus, the infinitive ἐκλέξασθαι, shared with B (Swete), was changed to the future ἐκλέξεται by ca, cb2, in agreement with Q and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler), providing a finite verb for this clause. Eusebius wrote, πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακὸν ἀπειθεῖ πονηρίᾳ ἐκλέξασθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν.
16 Since the clause preceding καί was subordinated by διότι, the καὶ does not coordinate two clauses. It must therefore be understood adverbially.
Lord whistles for flies(7:17-19)[[@Bible:Isa 7:18-19]]
18 The antecedent referent for the neuter singular relative pronoun ὃ is unclear. Nothing explicit matches its gender and number: day is feminine, flies are plural, Lord is masculine. Only the action itself could be neuter singular, but this makes little sense. Silva disregarded the singular form, rendering it “the flies that rule;” Ottley has “the flies, that which ruleth over….” Instead of the present κυριεύει, the reading also of S and A (Rahlfs, Ziegler); B (Swete) has the future κυριεύσει. The future is out of place here, since it is in parallel with the present ἐστιν. κυριεύει, normally takes its object in the genitive, therefore in Q, the genitive neuter noun μέρους is the object of κυριεύει and the neuter pronoun ὃ is the subject. The parallelism with the bees (who also inhabit a certain region) indicate an accusative, making the neuter relative pronoun ὃ nominative. Eusebius commented, ταύταις ταῖς ἀποδοθείσαις Αἰγυπτιακαῖς μυίαις συριεῖν ὁ κύριος εἴρηται, “The Lord is said to whistle for these recompensed Egyptian flies” (1.45).
19 The masculine form πάντες indicates it is people rather than flies or bees (both feminine) that will go out. Eusebius saw the “flies” and “bees” as metaphors for military forces (1.45). The Egyptians under Necho were during the time of Josiah, and the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar were from the
land of the Assyrians. They settled in the ravines and caves, but unsurprisingly, Eusebius made no mention of them on the trees. Note ξύλῳ makes a repeat appearance from earlier in this chapter.
Lord’s razor(7:20-22)[[@Bible:Isa 7:20-22]]
20 ξυρήσει is the future of ξυράω, shave. The verb μεθύω means to get drunk, corresponding to the root שׁכר; μισθόω means to hire, corresponding to the root שׂכר. It is difficult to fit the prepositional phrase πέραν τοῦ ποταμοῦ into the sentence. It appears to express where the razor comes from. Silva and Ottley translated a different text, which includes the words ὅ ἐστιν before this phrase. Brenton thought the genitive βασιλέως Ἀσσυρίων modified ξυρῷ. Again, Silva and Ottley translated a different text, which does not have this difficulty. It is hard to tell whether the accusative τὰς τρίχας τῶν ποδῶν belongs with the preceding τὴν κεφαλήν (object of ξυρήσει) or the following τὸν πώγωνα (object of ἀφελεῖ). Brenton and Silva took it with the former, as object of ξυρήσει; Ottley preserved the ambiguity, with “shave … the head, and the hair of the feet, and the beard shall he take away.”
21 The noun δάμαλιν appeared previously in 5:18, translating the same Hebrew word. It is not made explicit whether raising a heifer and two sheep is an indication of abundance or scarcity. Eusebius saw it as πενίαν ὑπερβάλλουσαν “utter destitution” (1.47). The preceding verse implies captivity; the following verse, abundance.
22 The neuter πλεῖστον (superlative of πολύς) is used adverbially. The production (ποιεῖν) is “most abundant.” The phrase βούτυρον καὶ μέλι appeared earlier in 7:15, translating the same Hebrew words. There these appeared as the food the child would eat before he was of the age of understanding. The implication seems to be that “that day” would come within several years. Here the abundance of milk production is stated explicitly, which seems unexpected given the clear threat of verse 20 and the ambiguity of verse 21.
From fertile to barren land(7:23-24)[[@Bible:Isa 7:23-25]]
23 The σίκλος was a weight or coin named for the Hebrew שׁקל, but here it translates כסף. χέρσος refers to dry land as opposed to sea, but also dry land as opposed to fertile land, especially in the papyri.
24 The dart and arrow imply that hunters will travel to these uninhabited areas.
From barren to fertile land(7:25)[[@Bible:Isa 7:23-25]]
25 An improvement on Ottley’s or Brenton’s translations, that every mountain “shall be deeply ploughed” and “shall be certainly ploughed” is to take the literal translation of the Pual (passive) participle מעדר ἀροτριώμενον as indicating the arability of the land. Silva left the participle ambiguous: “every hill being plowed will be plowed.” Ottley and Brenton rendered the phrase as an emphatic because the main verb ἀροτριαθήσεται is cognate to the preceding participle ἀροτριώμενον. At first glance the sense of ἀπό here seems to be to indicate the cause of the clause: “because of the dry land and thorn, it will be….” But the presence of εἰς makes the ἀπό phrase refer to the previous (barren) state from which the new (fertile) state emerges. In contrast to previous instances of ἄκανθαι in this paragraph, in this verse we have the singular form ἀκάνθης. Note the parallel between the δάμαλιν βοῶν καὶ δύο πρόβατα from 7:21 and the προβάτου and βοός here. The noun καταπάτημα appeared earlier in 5:5, there the result of destroying the vineyard. It will appear again in paragraphs 84, 125, and 164, always as the object of εἰς.
Quickly Plunder; Swiftly Capture(8:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 8:1-4]]
1 Chapter 8 opens with a first-person narrative, reminiscent of chapter 6, in contrast to the third-person narrative of chapter 7. Lord speaks to the prophet, impregnates the prophetess, and the prophet names the son. Swete accented πρός με as πρὸς μέ. The accentuation Λάβε follows Swete and Ziegler; Rahlfs accents this as Λαβέ. It is unclear what the genitive καινοῦ μεγάλου is modifying. Silva has “a scroll of a new large one” with a note, “Or a leaf from a large new scroll.” Ottley has “a leaf of a new great sheet.” Eusebius understood these as attributive adjectives: τόμον καινὸν καὶ μέγαν (1.48). Katz accepted the emendation גורל for גדול, and conjectured τόμον κλήρου as the original translation that later became corrupted as τόμον καινόν. μεγάλου was then added to the Greek after גדול had become the accepted Hebrew reading (Katz 1946). The significance of ἀνθρώπου modifying γραφίδι is unclear. Ottley and Silva both have simply “a man’s pen.” Eusebius claimed that the writing with a normal human pen (rather than writing with the power of God) was to maintain secrecy to keep rumours from circulating. The usual interpretation of the articular infinitive Τοῦ … ποιῆσαι is purpose, although Brenton translated, “concerning the making a rapid plunder of spoils.” It makes no sense for plunder to be the purpose of the writing, so I take this phrase to be the content of the writing (as
implied by Ottley and Silva). Harsh vocabulary is used in this writing: προνομή refers to foraging, the spoils of war, σκῦλον also means spoils or booty, goods taken violently, and ὀξέως is adverb of ὀξύς, sharp. The subject of πάρεστιν is not indicated. Ottley and Silva both took it as a neuter, with “it is at hand” and “it is near,” respectively. It is not clear whether πάρεστιν γάρ is included in what is written, or if it is the reason for writing. Eusebius said the writing was about the plundering from spoils quickly, i.e., the binding the strong man and plundering his goods described in Matt 12:29 and Luke 11:22. In his interpretation, the exact words to be written (γράφε ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα ἐν τῷ λεχθέντι τόμῳ) are: καὶ προσῆλθον πρὸς τὴν προφῆτιν, καὶ ἐν γαστρὶ ἔλαβεν καὶ ἔτεκεν υἱόν (1.48). In other words, it was to be a secret that the Lord was the one who impregnated the prophetess.
2 The document is binding enough to require witnesses. Swete accents μάρτυράς as μάρτυρὰς. The accusatives τὸν Οὐρίαν καὶ τὸν Ζαχαρίαν υἱὸν Βαραχίου are in apposition to ἀνθρώπους.
3 Because Q has a textual variant shared by S and A (third person singular rather than first person singular or third person plural), it is not clear who the third person subject of προσῆλθεν might be. The possible candidates are Isaiah, one of the witnesses, Achaz, and Lord, with problems associated with all of these. Isaiah does not fit as the subject of a third person verb because in this chapter he is the first person narrator. None of the three witnesses is singled out; they are mentioned together as plural, not singular. Achaz does not appear in this chapter, and his presence would have to be assumed based on the connection to the preceding chapter. Lord is the best candidate syntactically (as the last third-person subject); although a reader might be surprised that Lord would engage in a physical act, that is certainly how Eusebius interpreted it (1.48). As also in MT, there is no indication here who specifically τὴν προφῆτιν might refer to, other than the observation that the prophet’s wife might be called a prophetess, which would explain why the prophet is the one naming the son. Eusebius of course took this prophetess to be Mary. At least several months are telescoped into this one verse, several centuries in Eusebius’s interpretation. Eusebius explained, “he relates the things that are about to be as though they had already happened.”
4 The reason for the statement just made is introduced by διότι. A phrase similar to διότι πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον appeared earlier in 7:16 (πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι αὐτὸν in 7:15). The Hebrew is כי בטרם ידע הנער in both places (לדעתו in 7:15). The vocabulary σκῦλα recalls 8:1 and 8:3, and βασιλέως Ἀσσυρίων recalls 7:20 (and τὸν
βασιλέα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων in 7:17). The reason the boy is given such a quick and looting name is that the threatening powers will soon be despoiled.
The subject of λήμψεται could be the child or Lord, or someone indefinite. The child is preferable because he is the most recent subject, and Lord is speaking. Ottley has “(one) shall take”; Silva has “it will receive.” Both are reasonable interpretations. Eusebius took this to be the child (1.48). Eusebius included chapter 8 in the prophecy of Emmanuel (1.48). He said that at this point the Lords shifts from addressing Ahaz to addressing the prophet privately.
The mighty and abundant river(8:5-8)[[@Bible:Isa 8:5-8]]
6 The phrase τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον recalls 6:9, 10; in both cases, the people did not listen to Lord. Sheppard suggested that τοῦ Σιλωάμ most probably represents a Hebrew dual form compressed in pronunciation as הַשִּׁלֹחָם (1915).
7 In response to this rebuff, Lord intends to send the king of the Assyrians, an expression that recalls 7:17. The present tense ἀνάγει is used to represent the Hebrew participle, which indicates the impending future. The phrase ἀναβήσεται ἐπί is a literal translation of עלה על. The imagery of water overflowing banks implies that the Assyrians will be just as unstoppable.
8 Along with sending this flood, Lord intends to eliminate anyone of power from Judea. G differs greatly from the MT in 8:8. NRSV reads “it will sweep on into Judah as a flood, and, pouring over, it will reach up to the neck; and its outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel.” Although G literally says Lord will remove a single person, the context demands that this be interpreted as if πάντα were added before ἄνθρωπον. Without this πάντα or a negative particle, the disjunctive particle ἤ is not what a reader would expect.
God is with us(8:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 8:8-10]]
8 In 7:14, the Hebrew name was transliterated rather than translated as it is here Μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός. Matt 1:23 quotes 8:8 as καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ,
ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον μεθʼ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός, combining 7:14 with 8:8 or 8:10. Seeligmann saw fulfilment-interpretation here (1948, 83–86).
9 The presence of Lord among his people guarantees their victory. Any opponents will necessarily be foiled. Among the translated books of the OT, ἡσσάομαι appears only in Isaiah, 10 times, always translating the verb חתת, which elsewhere tends to be translated πτοέω. As an imperative (in the context of other imperatives), perhaps ἡττᾶσθε should be rendered “yield.” The participle ἰσχυκότες translates an imperative in the MT. In G the participle could be (a) temporal (as Brenton and Ottley took it, “when ye are waxed strong, be overcome”), (b) concessive (“although you have become strong, yield!”), or (c) vocative (as Eusebius understood it; “You who have become strong, be overcome”).
10 The accusative λόγον makes the syntax awkward, since parallelism indicates this “word” is functioning as the subject of ἐμμείνῃ. The nominative form would be expected here. The reason for the word not standing is introduced by ὅτι, namely, the presence of God. The implication is that any human plan or idea will be overwhelmed by God’s presence (and will). Eusebius explained that “whatever word you speak” means “threatening to do anything contrary to Emmanuel” (1.50).
Lord will be your help(8:11-14)[[@Bible:Isa 8:11-15]]
11 The confidence that comes from God’s presence leads to the following advice: do not fear what this people fears. Put yourself on Lord’s side, and he will then be a help rather than an obstacle for you. Arie van der Kooij (van der Kooij 1997a; 1997c; 1989; 1998a, 14) and J. Ross Wagner (Wagner 2007) have written on OG Isaiah 8:11-16. More recently a special issue of Adamantius includes several articles on Greek Isaiah 8-9 (le Boulluec 2007; Fédou 2007; Dogniez 2007; van der Kooij 2007; Morlet 2007; Munnich 2007). Lord’s message is addressed to an unspecified group, which is plural until the middle of 8:13, then the second person pronouns switch to the singular. Eusebius said the Lord is now addressing Jews. “The strong hand” is an awkward expression in Greek, and the English is an attempt to imitate this. The article τῇ, unexpected in Greek, is present because the Hebrew has it, in כחזקת היד. The continued themes of strength (ἰσχυρᾷ in 8:11) and inappropriate speech (εἴπητε in 8:12) connect this paragraph to what precedes.
12 Instead of μήποτε (accented as Rahlfs and Ziegler, μηποτε in A and B), S has μή. That which the people are not to say, σκληρόν, could be an exclamation “Hard!” or a statement “[It is] hard.” Silva translated, “Never say ‘Hard,’ for whatever this people says is hard.” Ottley has “Never speak ye stubbornly; for all that this people speaketh is stubborn.” In this context, perhaps like our “hardly” it is an expression of skepticism and improbability. The Hebrew of course is a different word, קשׁר (conspiracy), which was apparently read as קשׁה (hard), confusing resh with he. The reading ἐὰν agrees with S and with Ziegler (who included no note regarding A), but Ottley (with no note) and B (Swete notes only S with a variant) have ἂν. Normally the object of φοβέομαι would the thing feared, not fear (τὸν φόβον) itself. They are not to fear fear, or be troubled (aorist passive subjunctive of ταράσσω).
13 The proper source of one’s help is Lord, emphasized with the pronoun αὐτόν, which is a literal translation of the Hebrew emphatic אתו. The second person verb is plural, but the second person pronoun is singular. Instead of φόβος, as with all other manuscripts (and Swete, Rahlfs, Ziegler), S has βοηθός. The Hebrew is מורא, which was translated by φόβος in verse 12. 1 Pet 3:15 alludes to Isa 8:13 with κύριον δὲ τὸν Χριστὸν ἁγιάσατε, identifying Christ as Lord.
14 The singular second person pronouns switch back to the plural in the middle of 8:14. The perfect participle πεποιθώς appears in this form most often in Isaiah, where it translates eight different roots. In other books, it almost exclusively translates בטח. The combination of εἰμί with εἰς conveys becoming. Both λίθου and πέτρας are genitives modifying a dative noun. An obstacle can naturally be made of stone, so in that case the genitive would most readily be interpreted as indicating composition. But the relationship between a rock and a fall is not one of composition, but rather indicates the source or cause of the fall. Romans and 1 Peter allude to Isa 8:14. Rom 9:32-33 has διατί; ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐξ ἔργων: προσέκοψαν τῷ λίθῳ τοῦ προσκόμματος, καθὼς γέγραπται: ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν λίθον προσκόμματος καὶ πέτραν σκανδάλου, καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ οὐ καταισχυνθήσεται. 1 Pet 2:7-8 has οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας καὶ λίθος προσκόμματος καὶ πέτρα σκανδάλου, οἳ προσκόπτουσιν τῷ λόγῳ ἀπειθοῦντες, εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν.
Jacob and Jerusalem powerless(8:14-18)[[@Bible:Isa 8:11-15]]
14 Those ἐγκαθήμενοι Jerusalem (from ἐν-κάθημαι) are caught in two ways: in a παγίς (snare), and in a κοίλασμα (an indentation, cavity or hollow).
15 The third-person plural subject of πεσοῦνται is most likely the powerless who sit in Jerusalem. The fate of these trapped people is predicted by the future passive of συντρίβω, which means to destroy by breaking apart. Q and A read ἀσφαλείᾳ ὄντες (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Sinaiticus corrector cb2
changed S*’s ἀσφαλείᾳ (the reading also of B) to ἀσφαλείᾳ ὄντες (in line with Q and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but this change was reverted by cb3. Corrector cb2’s addition of ὄντες after ἀσφαλείᾳ resolves an ambiguity regarding what ἀσφαλείᾳ modifies: the action (happening “with confidence”) or the people (“secure”). The text of Q, A, and cb2 (which Rahlfs and Ziegler accept) makes it explicit that it is the people who are secure.
16 The accusative object τὸν νόμον could be the object of σφραγιζόμενοι or μαθεῖν. Syntactically the former is preferable; semantically, the latter. The intention is probably both: seal up the law so that one cannot learn it. The identity of those who seal it (σφραγιζόμενοι) is unclear. Arie van der Kooij understood them to be the speakers of 8:12-14, the opponents of the “hard” torah-obedience of “this people.” Wagner, on the other hand, argued that the speakers in 8:12-14 are the faithful, and those who seal up the law are those who seek help from mediums and do not trust in the Lord (263). These sealers will be φανεροί, which carries the meaning of “readily known,” but it is unclear whether this means they are exposed for who they are, or simply famous. Ottley, van der Kooij, and Silva translated it as “manifest.”
17 The most recent singular subject for ἐρεῖ is the house of Iakob in 8:14. The Hebrew has no counterpart to these words. πεποιθώς recalls 8:13.
18 The phrase ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ καὶ τὰ παιδία, ἅ μοι ἔδωκεν ὁ θεός is literal translation of הנה אנכי והילדים אשׁר נתן לי יהוה, except that μοι has been moved before the verb rather than after, and the tetragrammaton is rendered by ὁ θεός rather than κύριος. Heb 2:13 quotes this exact phrase verbatim. Q has a lacuna between Κυρίου and Σαβαώθ where the ink from an omicron has bled through from the opposite side of the page.
Diviners are no help(8:19-22)[[@Bible:Isa 8:19-23]]
19 The expression τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς φωνοῦντας καὶ τοὺς ἐγγαστριμύθους refers to mediums (compare ἐγγαστρίμαντις: “one that prophesies from the belly.”) The Hebrew has the somewhat less explicit “the ghosts and the spirits, those who chirp and those who mutter.” Note the connection between κοιλίας and κοιλάσματι in 8:14. The subject of εἴπωσιν is presumably those who have sealed the law in 8:16. The plural addressees (ὑμᾶς) presumably are resumed from 8:12, where the second person pronouns were plural (in 8:13-14 they were singular).
The identity of the speaker asking οὐκ ἔθνος πρὸς θεὸν αὐτοῦ is not specified. The one asking the question could be the mediums (as Ottley), or the speakers of verse 19 (the subject of εἴπωσιν), or Isaiah (as Silva). It is unclear how this question is supposed to support the any of these speakers’ points. One possibility is that they are suggesting contacting the local practitioners rather than those that are far away in Zion. Ottley reads, “Seek ye them that speak from the earth, and the ventriloquists, the babblers that talk from the belly: is it not a nation with its God?” However, the next question more clearly supports Isaiah’s point that diviners should not be consulted, so I interpret this preceding rhetorical question the same way: that the nation of Judea has its God, namely Lord, and he is the one to be consulted. Hence the questioner here would be Isaiah. Silva translated, “And if people say to you, ‘Seek those who utter sounds from the earth and the ventriloquists, the babblers who utter sounds out of their bellies,’ should not a nation be with its God? Why do they seek out the dead concerning the living?”
20 The reason for the law was so that they would not say “such things” (ὡς τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο). The syntax of περὶ οὗ οὐκ ἔστιν δῶρα δοῦναι περὶ αὐτοῦ is awkward but sensible, with a resumptive pronoun in a relative clause. What is difficult about this phrase is the meaning. On the surface, the clause says there are no gifts to give about this word, but what “gifts” might be given about a word is unclear. Ottley translated, “For he hath given them a law for their help: that they may speak not as this word, concerning which there is no giving of gifts.” Silva translated, “For he has given a law as a help so that they may not speak a word such as this one, concerning which there are no gifts to give.” Unlike the diviners, Lord requires no gifts to buy his help.
21 The recurrence of σκληρά recalls 8:12. ὡς ἂν with the subjunctive (πεινάσητε) indicates the time of an event in the future (BDAG s.v. ὡς 8c). The speech implied by κακῶς ἐρεῖτε presumably refers to the same kind of speech as τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο of 8:20. Instead of πατριά (the reading also of S, A, and B), Rahlfs and Ziegler both have παταχρα, following 93 (and noting the same word in Isa 37:38). Since the ruler τὸν ἄρχοντα is in parallel with the ancestral customs, he is presented with approval here. Note the shift to the third person in ἀναβλέψονται. The subject is not immediately obvious. The ἄρχοντα is not a good candidate because he is singular. In conjunction with the following verse, it seems that looking up is presented as a bad thing to do, presumably because it is seeking answers from diviners. So the plural subjects from 8:19 are probably indicated: those who have sealed, and who recommend diviners.
22 Again, they look (ἐμβλέψονται) for answers in the wrong places. What they will see there is not what they are seeking.
8:23-
23 The syntax of 8:23 is awkward; its interpretation even less clear. Ottley has, “And he that is in straitness shall not be dismayed until a season.” Similarly, Silva has, “and the one who is in distress will not be perplexed for a time.” The Hebrew כי לא מועף לאשׁר מוצק לה כעת is difficult, literally “Indeed no gloom for whom anxiety for her. As a time …” Ottley showed that G was translating phrase by phrase: כי לא מועף=Indeed not being gloomy=καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται; לאשׁר מוצק לה=which has anxiety=ὃ ἐν στενοχωρίᾳ; כעת=as a time=ὡς καιροῦ.
The verb ἀπορέω normally means to be at a loss, whether for goods or ideas. In the previous verse (8:22), G rendered a noun מעוף from this same root, so because he understood the form as a participle, he translated it with a future passive form of the cognate verb ἀπορέω. To preserve the play on words, I have translated “in difficulty.” The meaning then is that difficulty they see in 8:22 will not begin immediately.
1 Two differences of division appear at the boundary between chapters 8 and 9. One is the division of the last verses of chapter 8; the other is where chapter 9 begins. Rahlfs follows the MT. Ziegler follows Swete. The English versions follow the MT for verse division, but not for chapter division, and consequently not for verse numbering. The MT begins verse 23 with the words corresponding to καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται and English versions begin chapter 9 here, but Swete keeps these words in verse 22. Swete begins chapter 9 beginning with Τοῦτο πρῶτον, which is partway through the MT’s 8:23. Rahlfs begins a new paragraph there, but does not start chapter 9 until ὁ λαός, following the MT. Therefore the verse numbering in the rest of chapter 9 is one less in the MT and Rahlfs than in Swete, Ziegler, and the English versions. The numbering in Brenton and both Ottley’s translations (Heb. and LXX) agree with Swete’s. Silva’s numbering follows Ziegler.
Although Q*, A, B and S all read πίε, Rahlfs and Ziegler transcribed ποίει, following a marginal note in Q. The imperative πίε is to drink, but just what is to be drunk is not specified. Ottley conjectured that the original reading was a literal translation of the Hebrew:
ΠΡΩΤΟΝΤΑΧΥΕΠΕΙΤΑΠΑΧΥΠΟΙΕΙ which by scribal error became
ΠΡΩΤΟΝ———-ΠΙΕ—–ΤΑΧΥΠΟΙΕΙ. Matthew 4:15 is not much help because its quotation begins after this difficulty. Matt 4:15-16
Text
MT
Rahlfs
Swete
Ziegler
English
καὶ εἰς τὴν γῆν κάτω ἐμβλέψονται, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἀπορία στενὴ θλῖψις καὶ στενοχωρία καὶ σκότος, ὥστε μὴ βλέπειν
8:22
8:22
8:22
8:22
8:22
καὶ οὐκ ἀπορηθήσεται ὃς ἐν στενοχωρίᾳ ὢν ἕως καιροῦ.
8:23
8:23
8:22
8:22
9:1
Τοῦτο πρῶτον πίε, ταχὺ ποίει, χώρα Ζαβουλων, ἡ γῆ Νεφθαλιμ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ τὴν παραλίον καὶ πέραν τοῦ Ιορδάνου, Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν, τὰ μέρη τῆς Ιουδαίας.
8:23
8:23
9:1
(8:23) 9:1
9:1
ὁ λαὸς ὁ πορευόμενος ἐν σκότει, ἴδετε φῶς μέγα· οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐν χώρᾳ σκιᾷ θανάτου, φῶς λάμψει ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς.
9:1
9:1
9:2
(9:1) 9:2
9:2
quotes this verse as γῆ Ζαβουλὼν καὶ γῆ Νεφθαλείμ, ὁδὸν θαλάσσης πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν, ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐν σκότει φῶς εἶδεν μέγα, καὶ τοῖς καθημένοις ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς. Likewise, Christ’s Descent into Hell 2:1 cites it as ὁ προφήτης Ἡσαἰας ἐκεῖ παρὼν εἶπε· τοῦτο τὸ φῶς ἐκ τοῦ πατρός ἐστι καὶ ἐκ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος· περὶ οὗ προεφήτευσα ἔτι ζῶν λέγων· γῆ Ζαβουλὼν καὶ γῆ Νεφθαλείμ, ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐν σκότει ἴδε φῶς μέγα. As it is, we have two singular imperatives addressed to the inhabitants of Zaboulon, Nephthaleim, the seaside, the trans-Jordan, Galilee, and Judea: drink this, and do it quickly! ,
2 The noun μέρος is a technical word for “district” in the papyri (Seeligmann 1948, 81; Johann Lust 1998, 161). Hanhart connected the joy here with the joy Simon Maccabee brought in 1 Macc 5:23. ,
3 Q has two instances of the verb εὐφραίνομαι, and another of the cognate noun, εὐφροσύνη. MT has three words from the root שׂמח and one other verb of rejoicing, יָגִילוּ.
They are gladdened ἐν ἀμήτῳ; which could be refer to either the time or the product of harvest. For the expression ὃν τρόπον see the comment at 5:24. They will be as happy as those who divide up or distribute (διαιρέω) the spoils of war.
4 Rahlfs and Ziegler disagreed about ἀφαιρεθήσεται; the MT has no word corresponding to it. The verb ἀπαιτέω as a translation appears mainly in Isaiah, rendering נגשׂ here and in 14:4, נשים in 3:12 (probably a misreading), and תפת in 30:3. What Lord does to the rod (διασκεδάννυμι) usually refers to scattering or dispersal. The day of Madiam might have been understood as a day in which Madiam was punished. See the note on 2:12.
5 The perfect participle of ἐπισυνάγω is used to provide the first image of the restoration. The noun καταλλαγή is generally an exchange; in NT usage, it is a change from enmity to friendship, i.e., reconciliation. Finally, ἀποτίνω is often used to refer to compensation for damages. In addition to Q, Swete also spelled ἀποτείσουσιν as ἀποτίσουσιν. On the form, see BDF §23. The Hebrew behind θελήσουσιν εἰ ἐγενήθησαν πυρίκαυστοι is לשׂרפה מאכלת אשׁ, which means “and it will be for burning – fire fuel.” Although Ottley’s judgement is overstated, that “the rest of the verse seems to have been beyond the translators’ knowledge,” G did apparently struggle with this clause, recognizing the ideas “be” “fire” and “burn,” but failing to make sense of them.
A son is given(9:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 9:5-6]]
6 The conjunction ὅτι parallels the one at the beginning of verses 4 and 5. All three provide the reason for the happiness described in 9:3: Lord has ended their oppression, their property will be returned, and now a great leader has been born to them. Since the καί before ἐδόθη is not at the beginning of the clause, it must be adverbial, which would be unexpected in an otherwise parallel set of statements. The noun ἄγγελος generally means a messenger. In biblical usage of course this often refers to an divine (angelic) messenger, but here, the messenger is from a council, so he might be termed an envoy. At first glance, the genitive relative pronoun in the relative clause οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ appears to modify ἡ ἀρχή (“whose beginning”), but by the end of the clause it appears that we have a genitive personal pronoun resuming the genitive relative pronoun (“on whose shoulders”). The three words μεγάλη βουλῆς ἄγγελος are G’s original translation.
Ziegler indicates that this section is marked by a obelus in 88 and the Syrohexapla. The same words added by Sinaiticus corrector ca, θαυμαστὸς σύμβουλος θεὸς ἰσχυρός ἐξουσιαστής, ἄρχων εἰρήνης πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, are included in the manuscripts Alexandrinus, 106, 26, Venetus, 109, 736, the full Lucianic family of manuscripts (albeit with an asterisk in 22, 48, 51, 231, and 763) including 46, 233, 456 , the corrector to 764, 87, 91, 309, 490, 377, 564, 565, 403, 613, 407, 538, 770, except that
Alexandrinus and 26 omit θεός, 109 and 736 transpose θαυμαστός συμβουλος with θεος ισχυρος They are also added in the Syropalestinian translation, Eusebius (Dem. ev.), Athanasius, Chrysostom, and possibly Theodoret. Clement has the slightly shorter θαυμαστος συμβουλος θεος δυναστης πατηρ αιωνιος αρχων ειρηνης. Other manuscripts not listed here do not include these additional words. Most but not all of the words in the addition to S can be traced to interpolation from the Three; the exceptions are εξουσιαστης and του μελλοντος. Aquila has θαυμαστος συμβουλος ισχυρος δυνατος πατηρ ετι αρχων ειρηνης. Symmachus has παραδοξασμος βουλευτικος ισχυρος δυνατος πατηρ αιωνος αρχων ειρηνης. Theodotion has θαυμαστος βουλευων ισχυρος δυναστης πατηρ αιωνιος αρχων ειρηνης. Ottley (1904, 1:2:155-156) summarized why these words are not “part of the true LXX. text: they are not in the earliest manuscripts S* and B (or Q); they are largely a duplicate rendering of μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος; the wording is close (but not identical) to that of the Three (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion). Ottley proposed that these words came from the version Theodotion revised (known from Daniel). Le Moigne noted that not only here in 9:6 but also in 22:21 G refrains from giving a person the title “father” even though that is what the Hebrew text has; at the same time, G attributes royal features to these (2008). Because in comparison to the Hebrew, the human messianic figure’s role has been reduced to that of a messenger, Johann Lust (1998) and John Collins (2008) disagreed with those (e.g., Coppens 1968) who claimed G enhances the messianic character of Isaiah’s oracles. (See also van der Kooij 2002.) Trigg compared Origen’s
use of the title “Angel of Great Counsel,” applied to Christ, to the image of the son as seraph in Isaiah 6 (1991). In place of γὰρ ἄξω, B’s reading is probably due to the absence of ἐγώ, so that γάρ falls in the second position in the sentence.
7 The infinitives κατορθῶσαι αὐτὴν καὶ ἀντιλαβέσθαι most simply would be understood as expressing purpose. ἀντιλαμβάνω usually takes its object in the genitive; here (in Q, as well as in A) it includes αὐτῆς, as does the Hebrew. The pronoun ταῦτα presumably refers to the birth of the child, and the peace that comes from his just government. ζῆλος means “intense positive interest,” according to BDAG, hence “eagerness” in the translation.
Building a new tower(9:8-12)[[@LXX:Isa 9:8-10]]
8 Earlier instances of ἐπί in G have carried a hostile sense, which certainly fits here with Lord sending θάνατον. Because the verbs in parallel (ἀπέστειλεν and ἦλθεν) both denote motion, yet the thing being moved is the object of ἀποστέλλω but the subject of ἔρχομαι, the semantic parallelism suggests the subject of ἦλθεν is death, not Lord.
9 The theme of arrogance reappears, confirming this as one of the main sins according to Isaiah.
10 The aorist subjunctive κόψωμεν (also in B) appears amongst other subjunctives, as the other uncials have it: the future ἐκκόψομεν in S; ἐκκόψωμεν in A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). In addition to Q, manuscripts A and B (followed by Swete, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) add another tree species, κέδρους.
11 The verb ἐπανίστημι denotes hostile uprising. Q (along with B and S corrector ca) contains the singular αὐτόν where S*, cb2, A (Rahlfs, Ziegler) read the plural αὐτοὺς. The singular form would refer to God; the plural would match the upcoming αὐτῶν. Silva has “And God will strike those who rise up against them on Mount Sion,” but the ἐπί immediately after the verb that also begins with ἐπί would more naturally be taken as the object of the verb, rather than the location at which the action indicated by ῥάξει takes place.
12 The Hebrew behind Συρίαν is ארם. This is a case of non-interpretive updating, since there is no change of referent. For another case, see the river in 27:12, which is called the “River of Egypt” in Hebrew, but the “Rhinokorouron” in Greek, with no difference in meaning. The expression ἡλίου ἀνατολῶν refers to the East, and ἡλίου δυσμῶν to the West. The Hebrew behind Ἕλληνας is פלשׁתים. This is a case of interpretive updating, since there is a change of referent (the Philistines are not the same as the Greeks), but not enough to be considered “actualization.” Those inhabiting Philistia in the translator’s time would have been Greek-speakers. Syria and the Greeks are presented as enemies of Israel, attacking it from both sides.
Still the hand is high(9:12-13)[[@Bible:Isa 9:10-12]]
12 In 5:25 we had the words ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή; this expression appears again in 9:17 and in 10:4. In 5:25, the preposition is unique; here the order τούτοις πᾶσιν is unique (but see the textual variants at 10:4). It is not stated explicity whose the wrath (θυμός) is.
13 The singular form ἀπεστράφη is repeated from the preceding verse. The collocation τὸν κύριον is a rare instance of the article preceding κύριος. The verb ἐξεζήτησαν is plural, despite the singular subject ὁ λαός and verbs ἀπεστράφη and ἐπλήγη.
Lord removes head and tail(9:14-16)[[@Bible:Isa 9:13-16]]
Rahlfs, following the MT, places the division between 9:14 and 15 (his 9:13 and 14) after ἡμέρᾳ. Swete and Ziegler divide the verses after ἀρχή.
14 The complementary extremes head and οὐράν (an animal’s tail) and great and small convey completeness.
15 πρεσβύτην … προφήτην are still the objects of ἀφεῖλεν, in apposition to κεφαλὴν καὶ οὐράν as well as μέγαν καὶ μικρόν. Rahlfs put αὕτη ἡ ἀρχή and οὗτος ἡ οὐρά in parentheses as explanatory glosses. ἀρχή here translates ראשׁ, as did κεφαλήν. It can refer to leadership or beginning, as also in 19:11, 13; 43:9, 13. The phrase τοὺς τὰ πρόσωπα θαυμάζοντας is more literally rendered, “the ones who admire the faces.” The reason τοὺς θαυμάζοντας is accusative is because it (like κεφαλὴν, οὐράν, μέγαν, μικρὸν, and πρεσβύτην) is an object of ἀφεῖλεν. The accusative object of θαυμάζοντας is πρόσωπα, which is a standard literal translation, but θαυμάζοντας is not; it is an unusual translation of נשׂא “lift.”
16 The English standard gloss “bless” for μακαρίζω is misleading. As BDAG notes, it means “to call or consider someone especially favored,” hence “congratulate” (LSJ) in this context. The phrase τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον carries negative connotations for a reader of G, since it was used to refer to the rebellious people of Israel in 6:8 and 8:6.
Lord’s wrath burns everything(9:17-21)[[@Bible:Isa 9:16-20]]
17 The happiness expressed by εὐφρανθήσεται recalls 9:3.
For discussion of Ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τούτοις οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή see the note at 9:12, where it also occurs.
18 LSJ identifies ἄγρωστις as dog’s-tooth grass, Cynodon Dactylon, and δάσος as a thicket or copse. The genitive τῶν βουνῶν is partitive in function.
19 The two words θυμός and ὀργή are synonyms in G. The tense of συγκέκαυται is perfect, a literal rendering of the Hebrew qatal form, but the time reference is future.
20 The obscure phrase ἐκκλινεῖ εἰς τὰ δεξιά is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The same is true of φάγεται ἐκ τῶν ἀριστερῶν again, a literal translation of the Hebrew, with the resulting Greek obscure. The meaning in Hebrew is that although they devour everything left and right, they are not satisfied. G changed the meaning of the Hebrew by his choice of conjunctions: ἀλλά, and ὅτι.
21 Ephraim and Manasseh are to besiege (πολιορκέω) Judah together. The genitive τοῦ is used rather than accusative, probably because a partitive sense is intended. Eusebius said they will devour the arms of one another (1.56). For πᾶσι τούτοις (πᾶσιν τούτοις in S), the other uncials A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have τούτοις πᾶσιν. See the note on 9:12.
[[@Bible:Isa 10:1-4]]Wicked scribes will flee their punishment(10:1-4)
1 A pair of woes (10:1, 5) begin the next two sections. The first condemns those who use their privilege (τοῖς γράφουσιν, the ability to write) to distort justice for the marginalized. The participle γράφοντες could indicate the time or the manner in which how they write; the temporal use fits the following verse better. Tertullian, Marc. 4.14 and 27, used Isa 10:1-2 as an example of how God inveighs against oppressors of the needy. Eusebius said this describes writers of false prophecies, presumably referrring to non-canonical Jewish scriptures (1.57). They write wickedness; the first πονηρίαν is the object of γράφουσιν since there must be a clause break one word before the postpositive particle γάρ; the second instance of πονηρίαν could be the object of the participle (“when they write wickedness, they write perverting…”) or of the finite verb (“when they write, they write wickedness, perverting…”). Instead of the second πονηρίαν (the reading also of S, A, and B and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler transcribed πόνον, hard work (with MT), citing in support only L′-96c, that is 22, 48, 51, 231, 763, 620, 147, and the corrector of 96.
2 Τhe participle form ἐκκλίνοντες indicates what form the writing wickedness takes. Although the intransitive sense of ἐκκλίνω is to turn aside (Gen 38:16), the transitive meaning is to bend or change (alter a name in Plato Cratylus 404d). So when justice is the object “pervert” is a close English approximation. Beggars, labourers, widows, and orphans are the representatives of the marginalized. The reading κρίματα of Q and S is plural in contrast to the singular κρίμα that appears in A, B (adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Possibly two words are meant: κρίμα τά, but this would mean ἁρπάζοντες had two accusative objects. πενήτων appears without an article, giving an indefinite sense. Instead of the dative αὐτοῖς (as found in A, B, S correctors ca and cb3, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S* has the accusative αὐτούς. There is a number mismatch between a plural pronoun and a singular noun in εἶναι αὐτοῖς χήραν, but this is possibly explained by the coordinated noun ὀρφανὸν later in the sentence. In the Gospels, ἁρπαγή refers to greed, but in the LXX it tends to refer to seized property. Eusebius said the false prophecies are lawless,
and lawless people seized everything from the inexperienced, orphans, and widows (1.57). The reference to scribes (who write) devouring widows’ houses in Mark 12:40 alludes to this passage.
3 The prophet warns of the “day of punishment” ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς. This day is referred to by 1 Peter 2:12 as ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς, when the Gentiles will glorify God after seeing his readers’ good deeds. The original reading of Sinaiticus τῇ ἡμέρᾳ (shared with B) was changed by cb2 to ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, (agreeing with Q and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but with no change of meaning, possibly under influence from 1 Peter 2:12 (ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπισκοπῆς). The prophet then begins addressing the scribes in the second person, asking what good their seized property will do them then, and where they will hide their δόξαν so that it cannot be repossessed. The prototypical meaning of δόξα is opinion. Most commonly though, it is a positive opinion of reputation, so glory or splendour. But in the context of leaving the δόξαν somewhere, it might refer to material possessions, “riches,” as in Gen 31:16 πάντα τὸν πλοῦτον καὶ τὴν δόξαν, ἣν ἀφείλατο ὁ θεὸς. Note the change from third to second person in ὑμῶν.
4 The prophecy against the wicked scribes concludes the same way as 9:12: ἐπὶ τούτοις πᾶσιν οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ὁ θυμός, ἀλλ’ ἔτι ἡ χεὶρ ὑψηλή. Instead of ὁ θυμός (the reading also of A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has ἡ ὀργή; the two are synonymous in G.
Woe to the Assyrians(10:5-7)[[@Bible:Isa 10:5-7]]
5 Whereas the first “woe” was directed to the scribes who administered justice, the second “woe” is directed at first glace to the Assyrians. Both are in the dative case after Οὐαί. The normal interpretation of the dative Ἀσσυρίοις after οὐαί is that that woe is directed to the Assyrians, who wield (rather than experience) God’s wrath. Eusebius said at this point the subject of the prophecy transitions from being Israel to the Assyrians. God raised up the Assyrians as his rod, and delivered into their hands, so that the anger and wrath would come upon the lawless nation who was supposed to be his people (1.58). According to his understanding, the woe is not to the Assyrians, but because of the Assyrians. The reading of Vaticanus has the nominative and adds the article, ἡ ὀργή, so that the rod and the wrath are in their hand.
6 The prophecy then refers to sending wrath against a lawless nation, plundering, and changing of mind, but in a way that makes it difficult to discern who is doing each of these. The Assyrians could be the lawless nation, but so could Israel, as Eusebius read it. Although normally “my people” would refer to Israel, if Lord is using the Assyrians for his purposes, they too could be called “my people.” The phrase σκῦλα καὶ προνομήν recalls the same plunder vocabulary seen in the last few chapters.
7 The prophecy refers to someone not planning this, but it is not explicitly stated who did not plan, and what unplanned thing is happening. The most recent possible referent for the subject αὐτός is λαός, the lawless nation of 10:6, hence the translation “it,” but this identification runs into problems in 10:8. Eusebius understands the referent to be Assyria (Ὁ δὲ Ἀσσύριος τὴν παρ’ ἐμοῦ λαβὼν ἐξουσίαν οὐχ οὕτως ἐνεθυμήθη, 1.58). In this case, the phrase οὐχ οὕτως ἐνεθυμήθη means this is not the way the lawless nation planned it. Instead of the future indicative ἀπαλλάξει (the reading also of S, A, and B and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured the infinitive ἀπαλλάξαι, with the note “scripsi: cf. Hi. (ut conterat)]-ξει codd.gr.et verss.” But the infinitive does not fit the nominative subject. Instead of καὶ τοῦ ἐξολεθρεῦσαι ἔθνη as with A (and followed by Ziegler), S hs ἔθνη ἐξολεθρεῦσαι, B has καὶ τοῦ ἔθνη ἐξολοθρεῦσαι, and Rahlfs has καὶ τοῦ ἔθνη ἐξολεθρεῦσαι. Both verbs mean the same thing. Much like Joseph’s comment to his brothers in Genesis 50:20 that what they planned for evil, God planned for good, Isaiah affirms that Lord’s plans happen no matter the intentions of the agents.
He will take all regions(10:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 10:8-10]]
8 The subject of εἴπωσιν is either indefinite, or the nations just mentioned. The referent of αὐτῷ would at first glance appear to be the same as in the preceding verses, but here the addressee appears to be an individual rather than a nation. Likely the nation is simply being personified.
9 Οὐκ introduces a question expecting an affirmative answer.
10 Since the first instance of καί is not coordinating two clauses, this must be an adverbial use.
Jerusalem’s images will be like Samaria’s(10:10-14)[[@Bible:Isa 10:10-11]]
10 Clement of Alexandria quoted 10:10-11 in Exhortation 8, in a warning not to be idolators, saying those who wail are not the idols themselves, but those who trust in them. The verb ὀλολύζω is onomatopoetic, just as its Hebrew counterpart אליל.
11 The vocative τὰ γλυπτά is here synonymous with χειροποιητα and εἰδωλα. In the phrase ἐποίησα Σαμαρείᾳ, the verb ποιέω with dative indicates treatment (BDAG s.v. ποιέω 4). The presence of ἐν in Q and S breaks the formal parallelism with Samaria. With a city as its object, the natural reading is that the prepositional phrase indicates the location of the action. The way that Lord treated Samaria and her hand-made things will be the same as how he treats in Jerusalem.
12 The complement of συντελέω should be an infinitive or a noun in the accusative, not a nominative participle such as ποιῶν. The Hebrew here is a noun, מעשׂהו. The use of νοῦν recalls 10:7, where the νοῦς would change to destroy nations. The accusative case in τὸν ἄρχοντα τῶν Ἀσσυρίων is ambiguous. It could be part of the preposition phrase in apposition to τὸν νοῦν τὸν μέγαν, or (more likely, since there is no other object of this transitive verb) the object of ἐπάξει. Ottley and Silva both supplied an object: “he shall turn (his hand) against the mighty mind, against the ruler of the Assyrians;” “he will bring his wrath against the great mind, the ruler of the Assyrians,” respectively.
13 The subject of εἶπεν is the νοῦς against whom Lord is bringing punishment. His boast consists of future first person verbs, such as ἀφελῶ, the future of ἀφαιρέω, and προνομεύσω, which is cognate with the noun προνομή, plunder. Before both instances of τῇ, B has ἐν, which matches the Hebrew more literally. The division between 10:13 and 14 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 14 after καὶ σείσω πόλεις κατοικουμένας, and Swete/Ziegler
begin verse 14 before these words.
14 νοσσιά can refer to a brood of young birds, but the context with eggs here demands a nest. In Greek, it is not necessary to explicitly identify the person to whom the body part belongs, but it is in English, so “my” is supplied in the translation. God takes the world in his hand as easily as a human would take a nest in his hand. Q, S, Swete and Ottley spell καταλελειμμένα ᾠὰ as καταλελιμμένα ὠὰ. On the spelling of ᾠόν see BDF §26. The future middle διαφεύξεταί translates a Qal participle, as does the aorist subjunctive of ἀντιλέγω (ἀντεῖπον). Clement of Alexandria quoted 10:14 in Exhortation 8, between a warning against idolatry and a proof of God’s wisdom. He used the same verse in Strom. 5.14, claiming Orpheus got his idea of God’s grasp of the universe from Isaiah and Jeremiah. Hippolytus’s Antichr. 16 quotes 10:12-17 as referring to Antichrist. Chrysostom used 10:14 to show the folly of priding oneself in one’s wisdom (Homily 20, on Romans 12:3.
The tool depends on its master(10:15-17)[[@Bible:Isa 10:15-16]]
15 The negative μή introduces questions expecting a negative answer, as in, “An axe (ἀξίνη) will not be glorified without the one who cuts with it, will it?” In parallel with the axe is πρίων, a saw. The meaning of ὡσαύτως ἐάν is “the same applies to…” The expression καὶ οὐχ οὕτως is very awkward. Ottley rendered it “as if one should lift a rod or staff, and not thus?” Silva used the more sensible “Just so would it be if someone were to lift a rod or a log. But not so!” G read לכן as two words: לא כן, which would be literally translated as οὐχ οὕτως. The division between 10:15 and 16 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 16 after καὶ οὐχ οὕτως, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words.
16 Instead of the future indicative ἀποστελεῖ as also in A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S* has the aorist subjunctive ἀποστείλῃ. The preposition εἰς is puzzling before τὴν σὴν δόξαν. The normal meaning of εἰς, in which there is motion or at least change, does not fit here. Eusebius simply quoted the phrase without explanation. Brenton has “fire shall be kindled upon thy glory,” Ottley translated, “fire shall burn against thy glory,” and Silva translated, “fire will burn on your glory.” The meaning from the
context, especially the parallel clause, is clear enough: fire will cause the glory to disappear and be replaced by dishonour.
17 The words ἔσται … εἰς are a literal translation of the Hebrew. Instead of the nominative χόρτος, A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the accusative χόρτον. In G, the fire is nonsensically compared to hay, consuming the wood. Origen (Princ. 2.10) used Isa 10:17 to argue that God’s fury helps purify souls. He used the same verse to show that ὕλη is not “matter” of the sort that bodies are made of (Princ. 4.1.32).
Israel’s fire will consume(10:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 10:17-19]]
18 The division between 10:17 and 18 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 18 after τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words. In Q the paragraph begins with these words, so my text division agrees with Swete and Ziegler here, against Rahlfs. The verb ἀποσβέννυμι normally means extinguish (a fire), and by extension can mean other kinds of coming to an end. The prepositional phrase ἀπὸ ψυχῆς ἕως σαρκῶν describes the extent of the consumption.
19 G moved the Hebrew preposition out of the phrase מספר יהיו into the preceding ἀπʼ αὐτῶν. Lust suggested that ἀριθμός may mean “census” in 2 Chr 2:16. Certainly the people are being counted. The plural object in παιδίον γράψει αὐτούς is a literal translation of the Hebrew. The image is that the number will be so small that a child can record it, as Eusebius explained, τοσοῦτοι ἔσονται ὡς δύνασθαι καὶ τὸ τυχὸν παιδίον τὸν ἀριθμὸν αὐτῶν παραλαβεῖν καὶ γραφῇ παραδοῦναι τοῦ λοιποῦ πλήθους ἀπολωλότος (1.59).
The remnant of Israel will trust God(10:20-21)[[@Bible:Isa 10:20-23]]
20 In a translation from Hebrew, προστίθημι usually means “add” when there is an indirect object, or “continue” when there is an infinitive, but here in the passive form with no indirect object, it is difficult to see to what the remnant is being added. Muraoka (2009, 599) said the use here is elliptical, and resumed by a finite verb. In this case the meaning is that the remnant will no longer continue to trust in those who wronged them. But in order to preserve the awkwardness of the Greek, I opted for a more literal translation. The dative τῇ ἀληθείᾳ indicates that they will truly trust the holy God of Israel.
The remnant will be saved(10:22-26)[[@Bible:Isa 10:20-23]]
22 The two words συντελῶν and συντέμνων sound alike; this similarity of sound is not present in the Hebrew כליון חרוץ שׁוטף. The periphrastic nominative participles need a subject, and “is” must be supplied in English, “who is fulfilling and cutting?” The only subject available to the reader is ὁ λαός, but the subject in 10:23, where these two words are recalled, is Lord. Eusebius simply quoted the phrase, and interpreted based on Isa 10:23. G uses συντέμνω also in 10:23 and 28:22, all translating חרץ. Daniel has συντέμνω twice, once for חרץ, and once for the hapax legomenon חתך.
23 The two words λόγον συντετμημένον bring together two parts of the preceding verse. Normally with συντέμνω, λόγον would be expected to refer to a narrative rather than finances, but both are possible. The reading of B, Κύριος rather than ὁ θεός, is probably influenced by Rom 9:27-28, where Paul mentioned Isa 10:22-23: Ἠσαΐας δὲ κράζει ὑπὲρ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ· Ἐὰν ᾖ ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης, τὸ ὑπόλειμμα σωθήσεται λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶ συντέμνων ποιήσει κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. Paul is likely quoting not Isaiah but Hosea 1:10 Καὶ ἦν ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης for the sand image. Two themes were picked up in the early Christian writers: (1) God making a shortened word in the whole earth, and (2) though Israel be like the sand of the sea, yet a remnant shall be saved (the passage quoted in Romans), by Cyprian (Dom. or. 28; Test. 2.3); Justin, Dial. 64; Chrysostom, Homily 16 on Romans 9, and Homily 2 on 2 Cor 1:11; Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed.
24 G consistently renders אשׁור as plural Ἀσσυρίων, except for once in 31:8 as Ασσουρ. The ὅτι before ῥάβδῳ πατάξει σε could express the reason not to be frightened (in the sense of Brenton’s and Silva’s “because” or Ottley’s “for”) or the content of the fear (“that”). Eusebius gave the reason they should not be frightened: although the Assyrians will strike with a rod, it is only for a little while. Ottley noted that this latter interpretation is the likely Hebrew meaning (Ottley 1904, 1:2.163). The subject of the singular verb πατάξει is unspecified. In Hebrew, Assyria fits because it is singular, but G has the plural Assyrians. God would be a natural choice as well, but then a first-person verb would be expected, as we have later in ἐπάξω. Eusebius saw here the king of the Assyrians (1.61). The word πληγὴν in 10:26 is anticipated. Matthijs J. de Jong identified (with the help of Neo-Assyrian texts) two layers in Isaiah
10:24-27, the first (10:24-25) from the time of Sargon (720 BCE) and the second (10:26-27) from the time of Josiah. The phrase “the road of Egypt” means not “as the Egyptians did” but is a name for the road to Egypt, “the Egypt Road” (de Jong 2010).
25 The object of Lord’s wrath is their βουλή, their plan or scheme (Penner 2019).
26 In Q (in slightly different order in A and B, Rahlfs and Ziegler), God will cause some unspecified antagonist to rise up against them; the textual reading in S says that God will cause them to rise up. This rising will correspond to the πληγή, a blow that causes a wound. The lack of the article τήν before Μαδιάμ in Q and B of course allows for the indeclinable noun to be genitive rather than accusative (as in S and A, Rahlfs and Ziegler). There is no explicit verb for the nominative subject ὁ θυμὸς; this verbless clause is in a future context. The phrase τῇ ὁδῷ τῇ κατὰ θάλασσαν recalls the ὁδὸν θαλάσσης in 9:1. Eusebius identified the way toward Egypt (τὴν ὁδὸν τὴν κατʼ Αἴγυπτον) not as a geographical location but as surrender to idolatry (1.61).
The yoke will be destroyed(10:27-31)[[@Bible:Isa 10:27-32]]
27 Behind ἀφαιρεθήσεται stands the Hebrew סר, which is the standard word G translates as ἀφαιρέω, as already in 1:16, 25; 3:1, 18; 5:5; 6:7; 7:17; 10:13. But G also uses it for all of the following words, כאת כפר אסף אפס הדף חלף מחה נטה ספה עבר עטה ערב פתח צלח שבת שלח, indicating ἀφαιρέω is a favourite of his. See the note on G’s vocabulary in the Introduction. The order of the two phrases ὁ φόβος αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ σοῦ καὶ ὁ ζυγὸς αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὤμου σου is the same as in S and A (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); B transposes these two phrases. The yoke is to be destroyed (καταφθείρω) from the shoulder, using imagery that recalls 9:3, significant in the light of the recent recollection of Μαδιὰμ in 10:26.
28 The division between 10:28 and 29 differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 29 after καὶ παρελεύσεται εἰς Μαγεδὼ καὶ ἐν Μαχμὰς θήσει τὰ σκεύη αὐτῶν·, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before these words.
30 Q reads Γαλλείμ ἐπακούσεται ἐν Σά (A and B have only one λ in Γαλείμ, and Rahlfs and Ziegler have Γαλλιμ, ἐπακούσεται Λαισα. Sinaiticus’ original reading Ταλείμ was changed by corrector ca to Γαλείμ.The future of ἐπακούω uses the middle form; the subject remains ἡ θυγάτηρ.
31 The division between 10:31 and 32 also differs between Rahlfs and Swete/Ziegler. Rahlfs begins verse 32 after παρακαλεῖτε, and Swete/Ziegler begin the verse before it. In G this word belongs with the words following, so my text division agrees with Swete and Ziegler here, against Rahlfs.
Encourage the daughter of Zion(10:32)[[@Bible:Isa 10:33-34]]
32 The phrase τοῦ μεῖναι is a wooden translation of לעמד, here acting as the complement of παρακαλεῖτε. The case of τὸ ὄρος could be either vocative or accusative. If vocative, it belongs with οἱ βουνοί; if accusative, in apposition to τὴν θυγατέρα. A first reading would not suggest the singular ὄρος as a vocative because the verb παρακαλεῖτε is plural. But by the end of the verse, the ὄρος makes sense as vocative when understood with βουνοί. Ottley has “Encourage her to day in the way to stay, encourage with the hand the hill, the daughter of Zion, and ye hills that are in Jerusalem.” Silva has “Encourage Sion today to remain in the way; O mount, as well as you hills that are in Ierousalem, with your hand encourage daughter Sion.”
Lord Sabaoth humbles the arrogant(10:33-34)[[@Bible:Isa 10:33-34]]
33 All three instances of δεσπότης in G appear in the phrase ὁ δεσπότης Κύριος Σαβαώθ, as translations of האדון יהוה צבאות. In place of the present συντάσσει (from συντάσσω), Q’s corrector, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the present συνταράσσει (from συνταράσσω); S has the future συνταράξει. Because prepositional phrases normally modify verbs rather than nouns unless preceded by an article matching the noun, μετὰ ἰσχύος indicates that it is not those esteemed but the act of confounding that is “with strength.” 1 Clement 59:3 paraphrases 10:33 as τοὺς ὑψηλοὺς ταπεινοῦντα.
The rod from the root of Jesse(11:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 11:1-5]]
1 The prophecy regarding the root of Jesse (11:1-12:1) is one of the primary sources of messianic expectations in Early Judaism, although there is no mention of anointing here. The “root of Jesse” indicates this person is descended from David. God’s spirit resting on him indicates he will be inspired and wise. There is no mention of physical or military action; he will be a fair judge, using truthful words. He will reverse the fortunes of the humble and the esteemed. The result will be an end to agression and injury. The innocent will be safe; those they used to fear are now tame. The surprising reason for this transformation: everyone and everything knowing Lord. At that time, the one rises up to rule nations will provide hope. Judah and Ephraim will no longer be rivals, and they will be restored from the lands to which they had scattered. Their fortunes will likewise be restored, as they plunder those who had oppressed them, in what resembles a second Exodus. The prophecy as it appears in G presents the future Davidic figure metaphorically as a “rod,” ῥάβδος and a “flower,” ἄνθος. Although ῥάβδος can mean a disciplinarian’s rod (as in Exodus 21:20; Micah 4:14), or a shepherd’s staff (Psalm 23:4), in this context where the royal family is mentioned, the sceptre of authority is connoted (as in Psalm 44(45):7; 109(110):2). Although καί presents two metaphors, it can be inferred that these refer to a single person not only from the fact that they both come up from the root, but also that a singular verb is used in 11:2. The word for root, ῥίζα, appears again in 40:24, both translating גזע. As Sollamo noted (2006, 360), ῥίζα and ἄνθος both appeared together previously in Isa 5:22-24. There, the root and flower were compared to dust and chaff. Eusebius said the stump refers to the descendants of David, but Jesse is named rather than David because of Jesse’s decent lifestyle (1.62). Clement of Alexandria quoted 11:1 in Strom. 5.6, when he mentions “the seven spirits resting on the rod that springs from the root of Jesse.” Justin 1 Apol 32 mixed 11:1 and 10 with Numbers: Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον ἐξ Ἰακώβ, καὶ ἄνθος ἀναβήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς ῥίζης Ἰεσσαί• καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν βραχίονα αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. In Q, the final three letters of ἀναβήσεται are written below the rest of the word on their own line rather than at the beginning of the next page.
2 The spirit of God “rests,” ἀναπαύσεται. The preposition (only in S) provides more of a sense of stopping movement, rather than the sense of ἀναπαύω by itself, of stopping activity. 1 Pet 4:14 quotes similar words: τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πνεῦμα ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς ἀναπαύεται.
3 The neuter πνεῦμα is nominative rather than accusative because ἐμπίπλημι takes the container in the accusative case, and if the substance with which it is filled is specified, that substance appears not in the accusative but the genitive
case. But the parallel expressions πνεῦμα σοφίας καὶ συνέσεως, πνεῦμα βουλῆς καὶ ἰσχύος, and πνεῦμα γνώσεως καὶ εὐσεβείας (11:2) indicate that here again the genitive indicates what kind of spirit. So rather than “a spirit will fill him with fear of God,” which would be the natural reading of this clause on its own, the preferable reading in context is, “a spirit of the fear of God will fill him.” The difference is simply that he is full of a spirit, not full of a fear.
He will render justice(11:3-5)[[@Bible:Isa 11:1-5]]
3 The spirit filling him leads the figure to judge with respect to reality rather than to the surface appearance. Judging according to δόξα (“opinion”) would take the person’s appearance or reputation (the way they appear to others) into account. In a judicial context, judging according to λαλιά, “speech” would take their ability to speak well into account. Eusebius saw a connection between the filling here and the “fulness of deity” of Col 2:9. Other early Christian interpretation saw here the six (Gryson 1990) or seven (Schlütz 1932) gifts of the Holy Spirit.
4 Judging with κρίσις is a positive thing in this context; it requires discernment. Q and S differ from the other uncials in directing the judgement toward the esteemed ἐνδόξους rather than the humble ταπεινούς. Λόγος is an unexpected translation of שבט; LXX-D says this is an interpretation of the figurative meaning; a word is what comes out of mouths. An alternative but more far-fetched explanation is that שבט is phonetically similar to the construct of שָׂפָה, and שָׂפָה is translated λόγος in Pr 16:21. The πνεῦμα from 11:2-3 reappears, but this time because of the mention of mouth and lips, breath rather than spirit comes to mind. In the context of wind perhaps “carry away” would fit the meaning of ἀναιρέω. The earlier objects of destruction were masculine plural (people); here the ἀσεβῆ is either singular (an ungodly person) or neuter (ungodly things); Brenton and Ottley translated the masculine singular. Silva left it ambiguous (“the ungodly”), which misleadingly implies masculine plural to an English reader.
5 This future Davidic inspired judge will be equipped with righteousness and truth. These will be his tools. The accusative τὴν ὀσφύν (11:5) “the waist” is not the subject or object, but still limits the verb “girded,” ἐζωσμένος (perfect passive participle of ζώννυμι). Manuscripts Q, S, and A differ from B in reading εἰλημμένος, the perfect passive participle of λαμβάνω rather than B’s εἱλημένος from εἰλέω or εἴλω, “wrap,” which fits the parallelism and context better, and which Rahlfs, Ziegler recognized as the original reading.
Peace among creatures(11:6-12)[[@Bible:Isa 11:6-9]]
6 The result of this truthful judging is that predators will coexist peacefully with their prey. Because Greek animal names are relatively uncommon to modern readers, I will simply note that πάρδαλις (11:6) is leopard (Panthera pardus/Felis pardus); ἐρίφῳ is a he-goat, μοσχάριον is the diminutive of μόσχος, a young bull, and ἄρκος is an alternate spelling of ἄρκτος, bear.
7 Carnivores will become herbivores, eating ἄχυρα, i.e., what is left over from threshing, “straw” or “chaff.”
8 The adjective νήπιον further diminuates what is already a diminuitive, παιδίον, emphasizing the innocence and powerlessness. Yet the innocent have nothing to fear from the formerly violent, represented by the notorious asp.
9 In parallel with the future indicative ἐπιβαλεῖ, Q’s first-hand, S, and B have κακοποιήσουσιν (11:9), in contrast to Q-corrector and A’s aorist subjunctive κακοποιήσωσιν, which fits better with οὐ μή and the parallel δύνωνται, and therefore is recognized by Rahlfs and Ziegler as the original reading. The conjunction ὅτι now provides the reason for this surprising future peaceful utopia: universal knowledge of the Lord. The reappearance of ἐμπίμπλημι recalls 11:3, where the spirit of the fear of God would fill (future, translating a weqatal). Here we have an aorist (translating a qatal), and the Hebrew roots differ. Because the active ἐμπίμπλημι takes an accusative to indicate the receptacle being filled, and a genitive to indicate the filling substance, with the passive ἐνεπλήσθη the receptacle is nominative ἡ σύμπασα, and what it is filled with is genitive τοῦ γνῶναι τὸν Κύριον “knowing the Lord.” An infinitive (κατακαλύψαι) is unexpected in this context but not unprecedented in the OG (Ezek 22:32; Num 23:19). Although Silva reads it as an infinitive “like much water to cover seas,” Brenton and Ottley take it not as an infinitive but as an optative in a comparative clause: “as much water covereth seas,” citing in support the clear optative in Isa 21:1. Manuscript V has a future here, as does Hab 2:14. The parallel between γνῶναι and κατακαλύψαι is somewhat weakened by the absence of τοῦ before κατακαλύψαι. Eusebius claimed the “whole earth” indicates the spread of the Church of God, which preaches righteous knowledge, whose floods cleanse the soul of all sordidness (1.62). The meaning is clear enough, even if the grammar is puzzling: the reason for the future peace is universal knowledge of the Lord.
[[@Bible:Isa 11:10-14]]
10 The future peace coincides with one rising up to rule nations. It is unclear at first glance whether this person “rising up to rule nations” is the same or a different person as the aforementioned root. The καί (11:10) could indicate two distinct leaders, the “root” and the ruler, in what would be a dual-leadership role. But the singular verb ἔσται points to a single person, in which case the καί is epexegetical, describing another role of the same person. To confirm this
interpretation, the following clause, ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν indicates they are the same. Eusebius certainly considered one person to be in view here, and the rising indicates the resurrection from the dead (1.62). The mention of ἀνάπαυσις recalls the ἀναπαύσεται of 11:2, where the spirit of God would rest on the rod from the root of Jesse. Eusebius identified this “rest” with the Savior’s death, in which he was glorified (John 17:15). Isa 11:10 is commonly quoted in early Christian writings, probably because Paul quoted it verbatim in Rom 15:12: καὶ πάλιν Ἠσαΐας λέγει· Ἔσται ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν· ἐπʼ αὐτῷ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. As mentioned at 11:1, Justin Martyr mixed 11:1 and 10 with Numbers. Cyprian quoted 11:10 in Test. 1.21. Novatian Trinity 9 quoted it to show Jesus would rise from the dead. Lactantius Inst. 4.13 quoted it to show Christ would be born according to the flesh, from the house of David. Apostolic Constitutions 5.20 quotes it to prove that the Gentiles would believe.
11 Those of God’s people who remain will return from all the countries where they have been scattered. The phrase ὃ ἂν καταλειφθῇ is neuter to match τὸ καταλειφθὲν. I therefore have translated both as “remnant” even though the two differ grammatically; the first is a participle, and the second is a relative clause. ὃ is not the masculine article, but the neuter relative pronoun, referring back to τὸ καταλειφθὲν.
12 The remnant are gathered from the four “wings,” πτέρυξ, a literal translation of the Hebrew כנף. Irenaeus alluded to 11:12 in Haer. 4.33.1, with the words, “He gathered from the ends of the earth into His Father’s fold the children who were scattered abroad.” The allusion is not precise, but because he quoted 11:4 in the same sentence, it is probable that he had this passage in mind.
Peace between Ephraim and Judah(11:13)[[@Bible:Isa 11:10-14]]
13 The practice of literal translation continues with ὁ ζῆλος Ἐφράιμ from the corresponding Hebrew קנאת אפרים. This ζῆλος is picked up later in the same verse with ζηλώσει, but because this second instance is in parallel with θλίψει, it is hostile. Ephraim and Judah are presented as the two parts of the remnant (Ephraim and Israel refer to the same people). The prophecy foresees peace between the two, and peace from their enemies, who will be destroyed.
Lord will desolate the sea of Egypt(11:14-12:2)[[@Bible:Isa 11:10-14]]
14 The reversal of fortunes enables Judah and Israel to travel the sea and gain from its riches, and reverse their relationship with Moab and Ammon. Although the form πετασθήσονται in 11:14 is from πετάζω, which is listed under πεταννύω “spread out” in LSJ, as Ottley noted, this must be the future passive of πέτομαι “fly,” as in Hab 1:8; 2 Samuel 22:11; Ps 17(18):10; 54(55):7. ἀλλοφύλων translates פלשׁתים, as usual; however in 9:12 פלשׁתים became Ἕλληνας. The accusative θάλασσαν does not fit with the intransitive verb πετασθήσονται, so it belongs with the upcoming verb προνομεύσουσιν. The rising of the sun indicates the East, the direction of Edom. Hippolytus, Comm. Dan. 2.40 quoted 11:14 to show that Moab and Ammon are sons of Esau. Again in Antichr. 51, he quoted: “And they shall fly in the boats of strangers, plundering the sea together, and (they shall spoil) them of the east: and they shall lay hands upon Moab first; and the children of Ammon shall first obey them.”
15 The prophecy continues the reversal of fortunes, now switching from Israel and Judah to Lord as the agent. Previously, the violence may have been read implicity against Edom, Moab, and Ammon, but now it is explicit, with desolation, striking, and a violent wind. The phrase ἐπιβαλεῖ τὴν χεῖρα links the behaviour of the human and divine agents, which had been described with the words ἐπιβαλοῦσιν τὰς χεῖρας in 11:14, as well as 11:8. The reappearance of πνεύματι recalls 11:2-4, and πατάξει recalls the phrase πατάξει γῆν from 11:4. Even ὑποδήμασιν “sandals” is brought back as a symbol of force, just as it was in 5:27.
16 Just as the ten plagues struck Egypt, Lord will again strike Egypt. Just as there was passage for Israel through the sea then, there will be a δίοδος, a way through, for the remnant again. Although to this point Lord had been spoken of in the third person, now a first person pronoun appears in “my people.” Arie van der Kooij argued that Greek Isa 11:11-16 and 49:5-6 (in contrast to the Hebrew) distinguish two groups in exile: (a) the people of Israel, and (b) a particular
group of Jews. G presents the Servant in exile who “shall be gathered” (49:5) as “my people in Egypt” in 11:16. The Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16; 19:25. Van der Kooij therefore suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” in Isa 42:1 refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394). In van der Kooij’s view, this group is the followers of Onias IV in Egypt (1997b, 395).
1 G keeps Isa 12:1 together with what precedes, which is reasonable given the linking phrase “on that day,” except that it involves another change of person from third person verb endings, this time to the second person. The addressee is singular, one who will praise Lord on the day of the new exodus. Eusebius understood this to be Egypt, which at his time had largely converted to Christianity and therefore were praising the Christ of God (1.64). Εὐλογήσῶ translates a yiqtol verb; in Q, A, and S corrector cb2 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), it is a future tense. In S* and B, it is a present (εὐλογω).
2 The individual’s (first person singular) praise continues, with multiple references to Lord’s salvation (σωτήρ, σωθήσομαι, σωτηρίαν), and the resulting confidence this inspires. The clause ὁ θεός μου σωτήρ μου κύριος (in Q and S, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has three nouns in the nominative case, but no third person verb, so one of them is a predicate nominative, and another is in apposition. The most definite (ὁ θεός μου) should be taken as the subject, the least definite (σωτήρ μου) as the predicate nominative. The name κύριος, being definite, is then in apposition to the subject, “Lord my god is my Savior.” Other manuscripts do not have κύριος here, thereby avoiding this grammatical difficulty. The resulting state for the individual is πεποιθώς, the same form that appeared in earlier in 8:14 and 8:17. Heb 2:13 quotes ἐγὼ ἔσομαι πεποιθὼς ἐπʼ αὐτῷ verbatim. Eusebius saw this fulfilled in his day, in that Egypt was no longer afraid to serve God according to the word of Christ (1.64). The two nominatives δόξα and αἴνεσις both serve the same function and are definite. Κύριος, a proper name, is also definite, so it is ambiguous which is the subject and which the predicate, i.e., whether “My glory and my praise is Lord.” Eusebius read it as I have translated, with glory and praise as predicate nominatives (1.64).
Sing about Lord(12:3-6)[[@Bible:Isa 12:3-13:1]]
3 The theme of salvation continues with a metaphor; salvation will be as abundant as water in a stream. But the verb ending has shifted back to second person, as in the beginning of 12:1, except that now it is plural. Brenton translated ἀντλήσετε (12:3), the future of ἀντλέω, as an imperative. ἀντλέω refers to taking liquid (here ὕδωρ) from out of something, here the πηγῶν (following Q’s corrector), which refer to an abundant water source. Q’s first-hand reading πληγῶν is likely nothing more than a minor scribal error; however, before the correction, it could be understood as a reference to the servant of chapter 53 (he is ἄνθρωπος ἐν πληγῇ who carries sins and endures pain in 53:3-5). Eusebius allegorized this spring of salvation as the words of the gospel that pour from the Holy Spirit (1.64).
4 The verb ending now changes back to singular ἐρεῖς (12:4), as the person the prophet is addressing (which according to Eusebius is the preacher of the gospel) is foretold to exhort another group (the Egyptians, according to Eusebius) to praise God. The quoted words use second person plural imperatives. ὑμνέω with an accusative of the person sung of means to celebrate or commemorate that person in a hymn; i.e., to sing in praise to or of that person. The parallel verb, βοάω, with an accusative of a thing normally means to use a loud voice to call for or celebrate that thing. A second pair of parallel exhortations begins with ἀναγγείλατε; ἀναγγέλλω normally means report or proclaim.
5 The repeated verb ἀναγγείλατε in 12:5 connects this verse to the preceding. Similarly, in 12:4 twice Lord’s “name” was the object of praise, as it is again here. In fact, Isa 12:5 and 6 are an expansion of 12:4.
6 ἀγαλλιάω implies an extreme degree of rejoicing, and the sound of ἀγαλλιάσθε resembles ἀναγγείλατε from the preceding verses. ὑψώθη ties 12:6 with 12:4 (where Lord’s name was exalted) and ὑψηλὰ in 12:5 (where his deeds were exalted). Finally, the prophecy ends with a return to the singular pronoun σου, although the second person verbs here have all been plural.
A vision against Babylon(13:1–8)[[@Bible:Isa 13:2-5]]
1 The entirety of Isaiah 13:1 is indented within the column of Marchalianus. The introduction of this “vision” is comparable to that of Isaiah 1:1, which read Ὅρασις, ἣν εἶδεν Ἠσαίας υἱὸς Ἀμώς, ἣν εἶδεν κατὰ τῆς Ἰουδαίας, καὶ κατὰ Ἰερουσαλήμ ἐν βασιλείᾳ Ὀζίου, καὶ Ἰωαθὰμ, καὶ Ἀχὰζ καὶ Ἑζεκίου. In comparison with chapter 1, the introduction here has no time reference. Chapters 15 and 17 begin similarly, and are directed against Moab and Damascus. Eusebius saw the vision against Babylon as the first in a series of ten prophecies against the nations of the world: against Babylon (13:1-14:27) Palestinians (14:28-32), Moab (15-16), Damascus (17-18), Egypt (19-20), “the wilderness” (21:1-10), Edom (21:11-12), Arabia (21:13-21), “the ravine of Zion” (i.e., the Jews, 22), and Tyre (23). The direction is clearly shifted away from Isaiah’s own people, but not in a simple geographical widening of scope, since the first, Babylon is the most distant of these three adversaries. The “vision” against Babylon (13:1-14), which Eusebius called the largest city of the Assyrians (1.65), describes a near future of wrath called “the day of Lord” (13:2-16). The Medes will leave Babylon desolate (13:17-22). Lord will reverse the fortunes of Israel (14:1-3) and Babylon (14:4-23). The Assyrians will be expelled from Israel (14:24-27), and trouble is on its way for foreigners (14:28-32). Eusebius separated this last “theme” against the “Philistines” from the “theme” against the Babylonians (1.65).
2 The announcement of Lord Sabaoth’s coming wrath in 13:2 is presented in vivid imagery, full of sights and sounds. It begins with a series of imperatives, leaving the reader wondering who is being addressed. The command is to raise a visible sign on ὄρους πεδινοῦ. This is not a pair of two nouns (a mountain of a plain), which would be ὄρους πεδίου. Rather, this noun modified by an adjective could mean a flat or low mountain (Johan Lust, Eynikel, and Hauspie 2008), or a mountain found on a plain (Silva 2007). πεδινός stands in antithetical parallelism with a forest in 32:19. Seeligmann suggested the word πεδινός was chosen because of the Aramaic root שפ”י “to be smooth” (compare Numbers 23:3) (1948, 50). The second imperative to raise their own voice still does not identify any addressees: who is being commanded to raise others’ voices. Since the command is to be comforted by the hand, presumably a comforting hand gesture is intended. With οἱ ἄρχοντες, an addressee is finally specified, but again it is not clear whether they are the addressees of ἄρατε and ὑψώσατε, or those referred to by ἑαυτῶν. I avoid “leaders” as a translation of ἄρχοντες because in the next verse I use “lead” for a different Greek word, ἄγω. Eusebius said that after this teaching directed generally to all arrogant rulers, he then focussed in on Babylon specifically (1.65).
3 To compound the ambiguity of the participants in this speech, in 13:3 now the speaker appears via first person pronouns. The reading of Q and S is followed
by Rahlfs: ἐγὼ ἄγω αὐτούς· ἡγιασμένοι εἰσίν, καὶ ἐγὼ ἄγω. In Vaticanus and Alexandrinus scribes skipped some words between the two instances of ἐγώ. Ziegler departed from Rahlfs’s reading with his ἁγιάζω αὐτούς· [ἡγιασμένοι εἰσί] καὶ ἐγὼ καλῶ. Ziegler’s ἁγιάζω and καλῶ are conjecture; the latter has support only in Tyconius (voco). At this point, because they are appointed, the referent of αὐτούς would seem to be the ἄρχοντες. Yet the speaker has still not been explicitly identified, though the fact that he must be someone in authority to make appointments implies that he is Lord. This inference is strengthed by the phrase πληρῶσαι τὸν θυμόν μου because the wrath mentioned so far in G has been Lord’s. Those who are fulfilling Lord’s wrath are called “giants,” whom Eusebius identified as either the personification of political powers, or the offspring of fallen angels (Gen 6:4; Baruch 3:26). Readers might revise their identification of those who Lord claims to appoint and lead. The identification between the referents of αὐτούς in this verse and οἱ ἄρχοντες of 13:2 is weakened in the reader’s mind. In G ὑβρίζω denotes a wicked attitude, so the reader becomes reluctant to believe the giants are Lord’s servants. The reader might imagine two groups: the sanctified rulers (appointed and led by the speaker), and the giants, fulfilling the speaker’s wrath.
4 The verbless clause φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν φωνὴ βασιλέων καὶ ἐθνῶν συνηγμένων (13:4) could be understood as an exclamation, with the two nominatives in apposition. This is how Eusebius evidently read it (he said nothing but the kings’ voices will escape, 1.65), and Silva too adopted this second interpretation: “A voice of many nations on the mountains like that of many nations!” (2007). Although the identity is not stated and different verbs are used in ἐντέταλται ἔθνει ὁπλομάχῳ, the fact that Lord appointed them gives the reader to this point the impression that this heavily-armed nation is the aforementioned “giants.”
5 These heavily armed men of Lord come from ἄκρου θεμελίου τοῦ οὐρανοῦ (13:5), where Eusebius said those awaiting the final judgement are imprisoned (1.65). These are the points where the dome of the sky rests on the earth. By this point, since the victims of the nation of armed giants are the whole world (not some sanctified rulers), this nation is identified with the rulers; their “sanctification” must therefore be a commissioning, setting them apart for this task.
6 The prophecy continues with a warning that the day of Lord is near, and this will not be a pleasant thing. It is characterized by crushing, weariness, and fear. See the note on ὀλολύζετε in 10:10, where an aorist of the same imperative appeared. Although the spelling of the original scribe of Q is ὀλολύζεται (indicative singular), the form should be plural to match the nominative ἄρχοντες of verse 2. ὀλολύζεται is a spelling variation of the plural imperative ὀλολύζετε, which is what Q’s corrector wrote, matching S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). That the day of the Lord is one decisive day is indicated by the article. The crushing from God is in parallel to the day of Lord, which makes it clear that this day is not of peace, but of violence.
7 The crushing from God results in weariness and fear. Although the verb ἐκλύω (13:7) normally means “set free” (LSJ), in early Christian literature (BDAG), the passive has the sense of “become weary, give out,” which fits this context better, including δειλιάω “be afraid.”
8 The fear is depicted in several images: old men (πρέσβεις, 13:8) are troubled (ταράσσω, 13:8) with pangs, they wail, and their face changes. The pangs are in the nominative case, ὠδῖνες αὐτοὺς ἕξουσιν, so the subject is the pangs; the old men are the object. συμφοράζω is a rare word, meaning bewail (LSJ; GELS). G translates ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον idiomatically from אישׁ אל רעהו, which would more literally be “man to his companion.” ἐξίστημι is prototypically “change,” often in the sense of being out of one’s mind with amazement, which is the sense of the Hebrew יתמהו. But here, in parallel with μεταβαλοῦσιν (it seems G thought “faces” was from the Hebrew verb פנה, which can mean “change”), simple “change” may have been understood by the reader. Eusebius said their faces will change colour as a result of their perplexity (1.65).
The sky will be darkened(13:9-12)[[@Bible:Isa 13:9-11]]
9 The description of the day of the Lord continues, now with an image of celestial darkness. In 13:6, the reading ἡ ἡμέρα was in Q, S, and A but B had only ἡμέρα without the article. This time, though, Rahlfs and Ziegler follow the reading of B rather than S and A because Codex Marchalianus (Q) is anarthrous. The coming day is ἀνίατος from ἰάομαι, meaning incurable. The syntactic relationship of θυμοῦ καὶ ὀργῆς is unclear. Brenton supplies a noun, “the day of the Lord is coming which cannot be escaped, a day of wrath and anger” (Brenton 1870), followed by Silva’s “the incurable day of the Lord comes, a day of wrath and
anger” (Silva 2007). Ottley treated these as modifiers of ἀνίατος: “the day of the Lord cometh, and there is no healing of its wrath and anger” (Ottley 1904). Usually ἰάομαι uses not simply a genitive but the preposition ἀπό to indicate the ailment from which the person is healed (BDAG), although Muraoka did present this possibility for ἀνίατος (Muraoka 1993). ἀνίατος cannot be a predicate nominative, “the day of Lord is incurable” because that would leave ἔρχεται alone in a clause with genitive modifiers θυμοῦ καὶ ὀργῆς. More naturally, ἔρχεται has as complement the aorist infinitive of τίθημι (which literally translates לשׂום). The day of Lord is to bring desolation to the whole world; the phrase τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην links this verse to 13:5, where Lord and his heavily armed nation come to spoil it. Sinners will be destroyed from “it” ἐξ αὐτῆς, that is, from the inhabited world. Irenaeus in Haer. 5.35.1 quoted 13:9 to show that the end times prophecies cannot be allegorized; they will occur after the coming of Antichrist.
10 Not only is the earth desolated, even the celestial bodies are affected. The stars, sun, and moon are all darkened. Because ἀνατέλλοντος has no article, this is not an attributive use of the genitive participle, but a circumstantial use of the genitive absolute: when the sun rises, the light will be dark. It is this imagery that Jesus uses in Mark 13:24 (see also Matt 24:29) to describe the eschaton. Clement of Alexandria (Exhortation 8) quoted 13:10 to show how thorough the judgement will be.
11 The paragraph ends with a series of first-person verbs: I will appoint (ἐντέλλω or ἐντελέω), destroy (ἀπόλλυμι), and bring down (ταπεινόω). If ἐντελοῦμαι is the future of ἐντέλλω (as in Matt 4:6; Luke 4:10), it recalls 13:4, where Lord had appointed or commanded (ἐντέταλται) an army. Here, however, the accusative objects are bad things and sins, and the dative objects are the world and the impious. Usually when ἐντέλλω has both accusative and dative modifiers, the action commanded is in the accusative, and the person commanded to do that action is in the dative. If we have such a construction here, the people would be commanded to do bad things and sins. The alternative possibility, that ἐντελοῦμαι is the present of ἐντελέω, “complete,” would probably not occur immediately to a reader because it is a rare word. The difficulty stems from G’s choice of ἐντέλλω to render פקד in the Hebrew phrase ופקדתי על תבל רעה ועל רשׁעים עונם. This is a reasonable equivalent, if the sense is “appoint.” As Eusebius wrote, “the ungodly were delivered over to suffer” (1.65). 1 Clement 59.3 alludes to 13:11 that God lays low the insolence of the haughty, by quoting ταπεινοῦντα ὕβριν ὑπερηφάνων.
12 The crushing of the day of Lord is so extensive that it results in depopulation. Humans will be rare because the created order will have become inhospitable. Usually when used in reference to people, ἔντιμοι would mean honoured, but when comparing humans to precious metals and stones, “valued” is preferable as an English translation. The gold is ἄπυρον, literally “unfired,” so gold nuggets are in view. The Hebrew place name translated Σουφείρ is אופיר, Ophir, which is spelled with the Σ also in 3 Kgdms 9:28; 10:11; 1 Ch 29:4; 2 Ch 8:18; 9:10. Ottley pointed out that the added Σ is not unprecedented in Greek transliterations of proper names, since B reads Num 34:20 Σεμιούδ and Num 34:23 Σουφί for עַמִּיהוּד and אֵפֹד respectively.
Lord Sabaoth’s wrath will shake the land(13:13)[[@Bible:Isa 13:12-13]]
13 Lord’s anger is introduced by the verb θυμωθήσεται (future passive of θυμόω). Q is unique in reading θυμὸν in place of the phrase θυμὸν ὀργῆς, which subsequently intensifies the wrath; when these two nouns are together in a genitive relationship, LEH suggests “fierce anger” (2003, s.v. θυμός).
Survivors will flee(13:14-18)[[@Bible:Isa 13:14-16]]
14 The scarcity of humans in the land does not make them safe. Even those who remain will be subject to capture, defeat, plunder, and rape (13:14-16). The first sentence (13:14) in this paragraph indicates they will be disorganized, fending for themselves. The result is that they will be turned back, ἀποστραφῆναι, the aorist passive infinitive of ἀποστρέφω. The passive form can be used in a middle sense, as in Acts 7:39 “they turned back to Egypt.”
15 Those who were unsuccessful in their retreat to their own land will be captured (ἁλίσκομαι, 13:15) and defeated (ἡττάομαι, prototypically “being inferior”). Those who try to organize themselves (perfect participle of συνάγω) will be executed
by the sword. Instead of ἐάν (the reading also of A and followed by Ziegler), Rahlfs has ἂν (the reading of S and B). In 13:13, Ziegler had the reverse: ἂν where S had ἐὰν. In both cases, Ziegler followed Q and A.
16 Whereas the men are victims of the sword, the children are victims of being dashed, the houses of plunder, and the women of rape (13:16). The verb προνομεύω reappears from 10:13 and 11:14. I take τὰς γυναῖκας αὐτῶν ἕξουσιν in this context as an act of personal violence parallel to plunder and death.
17 The prophecy now returns to speaking in the first-person, last seen in 13:11. Presumably, it is still Lord Sabaoth speaking (although Lord has been mentioned in the third person in 13:13), and he is still addressing the rulers. Here Lord introduces the Medes, who Eusebius identified as those who replaced the Assyrians, and were themselves subsequently replaced by the Persians (1.67). Lord claims to be raising the Medes against the addressees. Usually ἐπεγείρω (13:17) takes the person or thing being stirred up in the accusative case, and the person against which it is stirred up is in a prepositional phrase, with ἐπί or κατά or εἰς. Here we have the accusative, but with a dative case as well, serving the same function as the prepositional phrase. The fact that they need no money indicates their prior wealth.
18 The claim that the Medes will shatter (συντρίβω) the τοξεύματα “arrows” (13:18) means weapons can have no effect on the Medes. Standard English does not allow the distinction between the two kinds of “your” in the Greek. The first mention of “your” children is plural; the second is singular. For the second instance, instead of the reading of Q, σου, which is also in S, A, and B, Rahlfs conjectured οὐ, and Ziegler followed, supported by the Latin of Tyconius (non). The singular σου is certainly out of place in the context of the two preceding plural second person pronouns, but such switches of number are not uncommon in G. Whether the reading is σου or οὐ, the the negation of φείδομαι (which generally means by inaction stopping something, usually bad) is already conveyed by οὐδέ.
Babylon will be deserted(13:19-20)[[@Bible:Isa 13:19-22]]
19
The first device is a simile using ὃν τρόπον. The syntax is awkward, but the sense is clear enough: Babylon will experience the same fate as Sodom and Gomorra: catastrophe.
20 The catastrophe is of such an extent that people will not even visit it ever again. The Hebrew word behind τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον is נצח, not the usual one for eternity, but it is rendered this same way in 33:20, and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα in 28:28. Three clauses follow, each with οὐδέ and a subsequent negation (οὐ, μή, or both). The original reading of the first two is disputed. In the first instance, Q and S both read οὐδ’ οὐ μὴ but A, B, Rahlfs & Ziegler have οὐδὲ μὴ. In the second clause, Q agrees with A, B, Rahlfs & Ziegler in reading οὐδὲ μὴ while S is repeats οὐδ’ οὐ μὴ; but the last of the three parallel clauses certainly has both οὐδὲ and οὐ μὴ. The subject of the first εἰσέλθωσιν is not specified; it could be indefinite or the Arabs, because they are the subject of the next verb. Not even Arabs or shepherds go there. Instead of the future indicative ἀναπαύσονται (shared with S and B and adopted by Ziegler), A has the aorist subjunctive ἀναπαύσωνται (followed by Rahlfs), which fits the other parallel verbs better.
Babylon will be populated by spirits and beasts(13:21-22)[[@Bible:Isa 13:19-22]]
21 Instead of human visitors, Babylon will be the haunt of wild creatures. Instead of shepherds, wild animals and Sirens will rest (ἀναπαύσονται). The houses will be filled (ἐμπλησθήσονται, future passive of ἐμπίπλημι) with ἤχου, sound, in this context of animals, probably “noise” is a better translation, to indicate the chaos that results from the absence of humans. A Σειρήν was a woman or winged creature whose song lured sailors to the rocks (e.g., Odyssey 12.39). The Hebrew here is בנות יענה, ostrich daughters. In Micah 1:8, the ostriches are known for their “mourning;” there the Greek word Σειρήν is also used, as also in Jer 27:39. The Hebrew word appears in Isaiah also in 34:13 and 43:20, and in the Pentateuch in Lev 11:16 and Deut 14:15, all rendered with στρουθός, which means sparrow or ostrich. The Hebrew behind δαιμόνια is שׂעירים “goats,” which appears dozens of times in Leviticus and Numbers as χίμαρος. G never renders it as χίμαρος; in its other appearance in 34:14, it becomes ἕτερος, but δαιμόνια does appear earlier in that verse, translating צִיִּים. These divine beings dance there, using the same verb (ὀρχέομαι) as in Matt 14:6 and Mark 6:22.
22 The other two wild creatures to settle where Babylon used to be are the ὀνοκένταυροι and ἐχῖνοι. ὀνοκένταυρος, literally “donkey-centaur,” is defined by LSJ as “a kind of tailless ape,” citing Claudius Aelianus, De natura animalum 17.9, which describes a creature resembling an orangutan except for grey color; so Gossen suggested a gorilla (1935, sec. 241), and Scholfield a chimpanzee (Aelian 1958, 3:333): Ὀνοκενταύραν καλοῦσι ζῷόν τι, … ἀνθρώπῳ τὸ πρόσωπον εἴκασται, περιέρχονται δὲ αὐτὸ βαθεῖαι τρίχες. Since this is a word otherwise unattested in Greek before the 3rd century (it also appears in 34:14), it is presumably rare, and the reader of G would probably discern its meaning solely by etymology, “donkey-centaur.” The Hebrew is איים, which is also the word for island, and is rendered ὀνοκένταυρος again in 34:14; Q contains a marginal note at 34:14 with the readings of Aquila and Symmachus, which use Λιλιθ and Λάμιᾰ respectively in place of ὀνοκένταυροι. The fact that ἐχῖνοι (which LSJ identifies as the hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus) would make their nests (νοσσοποιήσουσιν) there indicates the dearth of humans in what used to be the great city Babylon. This prophecy refers not to the distant future; it is imminent. 1 Clement 23.5 quotes from 13:22 with the words ταχὐ ἤξει καὶ οὐ χρονιεῖ, to make his point that the end is coming soon.
Lord will have pity on Israel(14:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 14:1-2]]
1 Corresponding to Babylon’s reversal of fortune is Israel’s converse reversal from captivity to domination (14:1-2). Israel is called τὸν Ἰακώβ; the article on this proper name serves to indicate the direct object, and corresponds to the Hebrew definite direct object marker. Of the 40 times Jacob appears in G, 4 have the genitive article, and three have the accusative article. Never is the nominative or dative article used with Jacob in G. In the rest of the OG, the dative article is used with Jacob (more than the accusative and genitive combined), but never the nominative. The definite direct object marker אֵת gets omitted in translation before proper names in 7:12, 13; 8:13; 62:6, 9 (Lord); 11:3 (Judah); 11:13 (Ephraim); 13:19 (Sodom, Gomorra); 19:4, 13, 14 (Egypt); 20:4 (Ethiopia); 23:17 (Tyre); 36:2 (Rapsakes); 36:19 (Samaria); 36:20; 62:7; 65:18 (Jerusalem); 37:2 (Somnas, Eliakim); 37:12 (Charran). The definite direct object marker becomes the Greek article before proper names in 1:4; 6:1; 9:12; 11:9; 19:21 (Lord); 8:2 (Urias, Zacharias); 8:6 (Raasson); 9:11 (Israel); 9:20 (Manasseh); 13:17 (Medes); 14:1 (Jacob); 19:22 (Egypt). It is noteworthy that after chapter 19, the definite direct object marker never becomes the Greek article before proper names. The prophecy has Lord showing pity or mercy and “choosing” Jacob/Israel. The parallel between ἐλεήσει and ἐκλέξεται (a literal translation of בחר), is not semantic, but there is some similarity in sound. Their “rest” ἀναπαύσονται in the land recalls 13:20-21. The person added to their number is given as
γειώρας, a transliteration of גר, which would likely not be a familiar word to a Greek reader. Besides this occurence, Josephus also used the word as the surname of Simon (J.W. 2.652; 4.503; 5.11; 6.114; 7.25, 154, 265). Theodoret of Cyr (in Isaiam 5.208) explains that this is a proselyte (Γιώρας τῇ Ἑλλάδι φωνῇ ὁ προσήλυτος ἑρμηνεύεται), which is the word Eusebius indicates the other translators used. He describes such proselytes in words that sound like he means immigrants who adopt a host culture as their own: προσηλύτους τε αὐτῶν γενέσθαι καὶ προστεθῆναι τῷ οἴκῳ Ἰακὼβ οὐκ ὄντας μὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν, διὰ δὲ τὸ προσηλυτεῦσαι οἰκειουμένους αὐτοῖς ὡς μηδὲν διαφέρειν τῶν ἐγγενῶν καὶ ἀλλοφύλων (1.68). The two instances of προστεθήσεται each translate a different Hebrew word: first ונלוה then ונספחו. Both mean “be joined.” The resulting Greek sounds redundant rather than poetic.
2 Eusebius saw the fulfilment of the prophecy that nations would lead the house (singular) of Israel into their (plural) place in Cyrus’ edict, quoting Ezra 1:5-6. The reversal of the captives and dominators was fulfilled when the Persians and Medes defeated the Assyrians/Babylonians (1.68). As they increase in the land, they will become bondservants (εἰς δούλους καὶ δούλας). The preposition εἰς seems out of place here, but it is a literal translation of לעבדים ולשׁפחות. Ziegler listed Q’s first-hand reading as κυριευθήσεται, but Swete as κυριευθήσοται. The disputed character was an epsilon which was transformed into an omicron; a nu was then superscripted between the omicron and tau (κυριευθήσονται) to match the reading of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
God will give you rest in that day(14:3)[[@Bible:Isa 14:3-4]]
3 The restoration of Israel relieves them from their former suffering, which is now transferred to their former oppressors (14:3-4). In chapter 13, “that day” was a day of violence. Now (14:3), “that day” will bring rest, at least for Israel. The singular addressee implied by σε is not specified, but the context suggests it refers to the οἶκος Ἰσραήλ from 14:2. The verb for rest, ἀναπαύσει has three genitives: pain, temper, and servitude. Pain and servitude have parallel meanings, but θυμοῦ σου does not match the other two semantically. The pain and servitude are things God might stop his people from experiencing, and even wrath might fit, if it were God’s wrath. But it is the people’s θυμός. The possessive pronoun σου could modify ὀδύνης rather than θυμοῦ, but this possibility, attractive in both Marchalianus and Vaticanus, is weakened by the presence of the conjunction καί in S and A. The relative pronoun ἧς is genitive by attraction to δουλείας … σκληρᾶς; more properly it should be accusative or dative in the relative clause.
Dirge over the king of Babylon(14:4-6)[[@Bible:Isa 14:4-11]]
4 The singular addressee, the house of Israel, is to take up a θρῆνον, an expression of grief, over the king of Babylon. Robert Gordon identified various ancient near eastern stories of divine beings challenging their superiors and receiving punishment, and extended this theme to humans who likewise overstep their bounds by their aspirations to divinity. In addition to the Isaianic instances in Isaiah 14:3-23; 36-37; 26:13-15, biblical texts also include Psalm 82; Ezekiel 28, Genesis 6:1-4; 2-3, as well as the Gilgamesh Epic (R. P. Gordon 2010). A rhetorical question (πῶς normally introduces a question) celebrates the abrupt cessation of oppression. The active of ἀναπαύω in 14:3 meant to give rest; here the middle means to take rest, as those in Rev 14:13 retire (ἀναπαήσονται) from their labours. G manages to include alliteration in Πῶς ἀναπέπαυται ὁ ἀπαιτῶν καὶ ἀναπέπαυται ὁ ἐπισπουδαστής. Silva has “taskmaster” for the rare word ἐπισπουδαστής. The meaning of the MT מדהבה is uncertain: insolence, fury, hostility, and even golden city have been suggested. The opinion of most moderns is expressed by Wildberger: “מדהבה can hardly be the correct reading … the hiphʿil מַרְהִיב (tyrant, stormer) (or, if need be, the piʿel מְרַהֵב, ‘tyrant, stormer’) should be read here” (1997, 41). 1QIsaa confirms the reading מרהבה. Perhaps G had in mind the root מהר when he rendered it ἐπισπουδαστής.
5 The taskmaster has stopped because God has crushed (συντρίβω) the yoke of the sinners and rulers (14:5). These two objects of crushing are in synonymous parallelism, recalling the beginning of chapter 13 (13:2, 9).
6 The way God has crushed this yoke is expressed with the masculine nominative participle πατάξας, modifying ὁ θεός; the object of πατάξας is the neuter accusative ἔθνος. Both θυμῷ and πληγῇ are dative, but θυμῷ indicates the attitude of God, whereas πληγῇ indicates the means by which the striking happens. The blow with which he strikes is ἀνίατος, recalling the incurable blow of 13:9. παίω normally means to hit bodily; it takes an accusative to indicate the person receiving the blow. Here we have two accusatives, the other being πληγήν. In such cases the second accusative indicates the instrument, as in Aeschylus, Persians 408–409 ναῦς ἐν νηὶ χαλκήρη στόλον ἔπαισεν. Again, the blow (indicated by the feminine ἣ; it does not have God as referent) is unsparing; φείδομαι recalls 13:18. The phrase πατάξας ἔθνος θυμῷ πληγῇ ἀνιάτῳ is used by 2 Macc 9:5 ἐπάταξεν
αὐτὸν ἀνιάτῳ καὶ ἀοράτῳ πληγῇ with θυμῷ and θεός (from 14:5) in close proximity. Rahlfs divides 14:6 from 14:7 before ἀνεπαύσατο πεποιθώς; Swete and Ziegler do so after. In Q, the gap is slightly larger after these words than before, so my transcription follows Swete and Ziegler rather than Rahlfs here.
The appearance of ἀναπαύω again recalls 13:20, 21 and 14:1. No new subject has been introduced, so the one resting would seem to be God. The problem is that πεποιθώς is usually a word applied to humans rather than God (see the note on 12:2). Here it translates שׁקט “keep quiet.”
The land and trees rejoiced(14:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
8 The second person pronouns raise the question of the identity of the addressee. Eusebius said the trees were to rejoice over the fall of the absolute rulers, and falling asleep refers to death. Ἀφ οὗ σὺ κεκοίμησαι is a literal translation of מאז שׁכבת, “from (the time) when you have fallen asleep.” The perfect tense is unusual in G (except for the perfect of πείθω and καταλείπω); it is used 71 times for a qatal verb. Alexandrinus has κόπων from κοπόω, “exhaust,” but κόπτων, “one who chops” better fits the context of trees, and matches the Hebrew כרת, “cut.” Eusebius identified the “us” as those on the earth and those who have died and are in Hades.
Counted among the giant kings91
9 The name ᾅδης properly refers to the god of the underworld (hence κάτωθεν), death personified, but Eusebius treated Hades as a place (1.68). Eusebius interpreted the embittering (πικραίνω) of Hades as its anger and wrath, when it rises up (συναντήσας, a circumstantial participle modifying ἐπικράνθη) against the king of Babylon. The dative “you” in the phrase συνηγέρθησάν σοι would normally be understood as “with you” when with συνεγείρω, but BDAG offers “all rise up together for you” for Isa 14:9. The mention of giants and rulers (γίγαντες … ἄρξαντες) recalls the Babylonians from 13:2-3, and 14:5. For πάντες (the reading of Q and S), the other manuscripts (A and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read πάντας; this would make the kings (βασιλεῖς can be nominative or accusative; see 14:16) the direct objects of ἐγείραντες. The reading in Q and S yields an abundance of nominatives in 14:9: Hades with its singular verb ἐπικράνθη, and the giants and kings, with their plural verb συνηγέρθησαν.
10 The giant kings tell the king of Babylon that his fate is now the same as theirs. The ἑάλως (aorist indicative second person singular of ἁλίσκομαι) “you were taken” recalls 13:15. Here it translates חלה “be weak.” The king of Babylon is “reckoned” among the giants and kings; καταλογίζομαι appears only here in G, although it also appears in Wis 5:5.
11 The giant kings taunt the king of Babylon that his happiness is over; his buried body will be surrounded by decay and worms. Because Hades is the underworld, his glory and joy goes down (καταβαίνω). Below him they would spread (στρωννύω) putrefaction (σῆψις related to “septic”), and over him there would be a covering (κατακάλυμμα) of worms. σκώληξ refers especially to the kind of worm that eats rotting corpses; such worms are also mentioned in 2 Macc 9:9.
The dawn-bringer crushed into the land(14:12)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
12 A parallel rhetorical question introduced by πῶς matches that of 14:4, introducing a paragraph of the dirge that continues to express astonishment at the fate of such a lofty person as the king of Babylon falling so low. The height from which he fell is connoted by the label ἑωσφόρος, etymologically “dawn-bringer,” the name of the star that appears at the dawn. Greek ἀστήρ had the same connotation of “star” as English; it could be applied to an outstanding person. The bright star ἑωσφόρος was also known as Ἀφροδίτης ἀστήρ (Eudoxus, Ars astronomica 5.2), which was in turn also called Φωσφόρος (Geminus, Elementa astronmiae 1.28), meaning “light-bearer,” which is translated into Latin as lucifer. (ἑωσφόρος appears in some manuscripts of 2 Pet 1:19 for Φωσφόρος.) In any case, an illustrious person is meant. The connection between Lucifer and Satan is therefore not made here in Isaiah, but by Luke 10:18; Ottley also noted the similarity between Luke 10:15 and Isa 14:13, 15. Origen saw Lucifer as one of the fallen angels (Hom. Jes. Nav. 1.6) but did not imply he is their chief. In Comm. Ro. 8.9.4 he suggested Lucifer might be referring to Israel. Eusebius in his Commentary on Isaiah gave not the slightest indication of the interpretation of this fallen star as Satan, even though 2.7 shows he was familiar with fallen stars in the context of Satan falling from heaven by alluding to Luke 10:18 there. Rather, in commenting on 14:8-21, Eusebius took great pains to argue that this whole prophecy refers to the historical king of Babylon. Nevertheless, in Praep. ev. 7.16 he did connect Isaiah 14:12 with the leader of the fallen evil spirits. The participle ἀποστέλλων has a definite article in Q and the other uncials other than S; it has phonetic similarity to ἀνατέλλων earlier in the verse. G misread חולש as שולח and probably also על as כל. The ideas of falling to the earth are taken up in 2 Macc 9:7-8, but the parallels are not mainly on the level of vocabulary.
The dawn-bringer’s plan(14:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 14:4-11]]
13 After the rhetorical question, the pronouns shift back to the second person singular σύ. The nominatives in the preceding verse are not vocatives, since ἐξέπεσεν is third person. The private thoughts are indicated by ἐν τῇ
διανοίᾳ, rendering the Hebrew בלבב idiomatically. The rendering in Sinaiticus is more literal. Vaticanus has a different form for ἄστρων as well; by the second century, ἄστρον and ἀστήρ had become synonymous. The mention of the stars of the sky recalls 13:10. The king of Babylon plans to ascend even higher, to sit (καθίζω), i.e. be enthroned, on high mountains. Instead of οὐρανοῦ, Ziegler’s edition retroverts אל as θεοῦ, with support from Cyprian and Tyconius. The image of arrogance of reaching the stars of heaven is taken up in 2 Macc 9:10.
14 The upward mobility of the king does not stop with the mountains; he plans to be above the clouds, to the realm of the Most High. ὁ ὕψιστος is the standard translation of עליון, the title used of God (e.g., Gen 14:18; see Luke 1:32;Luke 6:35; Acts 7:4). This is the climactic expression of arrogance, the attitude condemned consistently in G. The arrogance of equating oneself to God is picked up by 2 Macc 9:12.
Those in Hades will be amazed(14:15-17)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
15 After that climax of arrogant imagination, the reality is broken to the king of Babylon: intstead of reaching the most high, he will reach the most low Hades, the very base of the world, even lower than earth itself. Instead of the accusative attested in both Marchalianus and Vaticanus, the genitive is the appropriate case for ᾅδου here (following Homer), since it is etymologically a proper name: (the abode) of Hades.
16 The reversal is a source of amazement for observers. The provocation he was known for (παροξύνω) is etymologically related to the word for sharpening.
17 They considered him ruthless, making the whole world (οἰκουμένη) a deserted place. Usually when τίθημι takes a double accusative, it is in the middle voice (Acts 20:28; 1 Cor 12:28). The phrase θεὶς τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην recalls especially 13:9, where God makes the world deserted, but also 10:14, 23; 13:5, 9, 11; anticipating 14:26; 37:18. The finite verb καθεῖλεν (aorist indicative of καθαιρέω) does not match the coordinated participle θείς. Another participle is expected, or at least a relative clause. The reappearance of ἐπαγωγῇ recalls 10:4; ἐπαγωγή generally means bringing in, so can be used for enticement, but in this military context, an “attack” would probably be understood, as in Polybius 10.23.7.
No honourable resting place for the dawn-bringer(14:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 14:12-19]]
18 The taunters compare the king of Babylon to other kings, who have stately burials. κοιμάω recalls 14:8, where the trees had not been chopped since they had fallen asleep. In the expression “each person in his house,” ἄνθρωπος is a literal translation of אישׁ, used distributively.
19 That will not be the fate of the king of Babylon, whose corpse will instead be disgraced. The phrase ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσιν has no counterpart in MT; Tov suggested it is here under influence of 34:3, which also has the passive of ῥίπτω and αἷμα: οἱ δὲ τραυματίαι αὐτῶν ῥιφήσονται καὶ οἱ νεκροί, καὶ ἀναβήσεται αὐτῶν ἡ ὀσμή, καὶ βραχήσεται τὰ ὄρη ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῶν. The Isaianic phrase is used by 2 Macc 9:28 ἐπὶ ξένης ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσιν οἰκτίστῳ μόρῳ κατέστρεψε τὸν βίον. Loathing is conveyed by the perfect passive participle of βδελύσσομαι. θνήσκω makes its only appearance in G here. The plural genitive ἐκκεκεντημένων and καταβαινόντων match the dead τεθνηκότων, so the “stabbed” who are going down are not the king but the dead; ἐκκεντέω is an appropriate but unprecedented translation of טען. Regarding the case of ᾅδου see the note on 14:15.
Garment stained with blood(14:19-23)[[@Bible:Isa 14:19-23]]
19 At this point the taunt ends, and first person pronouns are introduced. The image of a stained garment drives home the point that the king of Babylon’s offenses are beyond forgiveness. The staining is conveyed by the perfect passive participle of φύρω, prototypically “soak.” The words ἐν αἵματι … οὐκ ἔσται καθαρόν have no counterpart in Hebrew. The future (ἔσται) is not the expected tense; because οὐκ ἔσται καθαρόν is drawn from the next verse, the future here was probably chosen to match ἔσῃ there. Tov suggested ἐν αἵματι comes from 34:3.
20 The king’s offenses include destroying (ἀπώλεσας) “my” land and “my” people. ἀπόλλυμι is a favourite word of G; he uses it to translate 20 different Hebrew words. The introduction of a first-person singular pronoun μου indicates the dirge over the king of Babylon is over, although to this point there has been no explicit speaker since 13:3, 11. Eusebius identified the destruction of “my” land and people with the Babylonian capture of Israel. As a consequence of this destruction, the prophecy says he will not remain.
21 Eusebius said nothing about the Septuagint’s reading of 14:21, instead giving attention to the other translators, who imply the king of Babylon offered his own children as a sacrifice σφαγήν τε τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ τέκνοις προξενῆσαι. For the second σου “your father,” B has αὐτῶν “their father.” ἵνα expresses the purpose for preparing the children for slaughter: they are not supposed to rise (ἀναστῶσιν). By the time of Eusebius, resurrection from the dead would have been
understood, and the Christian reader would have recalled Matt 5:5 from τὴν γῆν κληρονομήσωσιν, but Eusebius did not develop these connections to Jesus’ preaching or resurrection.
ἐμπλήσωσι, the subjunctive of ἐμπίπλημι, matches the mood of ἀναστῶσιν and κληρονομήσωσιν.
22 Lord Sabaoth is now identified as the speaker, the subject of all the first person verbs since 14:20. He warns of his intention to oppose and destroy Babylonia. Several recurrences of vocabulary connect this verse to what preceded. The verb ἐπανίστημι recalls the enemies of 9:10. ἀπολῶ recalls 14:20, where Lord’s land was being destroyed.
23 The phrase θήσω … ἔρημον recalls 14:17 (see note there), where the whole world was deserted. The result of the destruction is that Babylonian will be inhabitable by hedgehogs. ὥστε with the infinitive normally is used in past contexts for the actual result (“with the result that”) but in future contexts can also be used for intended result “so that they could” (Matt 10:1; Luke 20:20). The reprisal of ἐχίνους recalls 13:22, where the hedgehog was building nests in a deserted Babylon. It will be demolished so thoroughly that it will become a clay pit.
The Assyrians will be destroyed(14:24-25)[[@Bible:Isa 14:24-25]]
24 Lord Sabaoth affirms his determination, as previously spoken. Nothing can change his mind.
25 He has determined to destroy (τοῦ ἀπολέσαι) the Assyrians from Israel (14:24-25). The mention of καταπάτημα recalls 5:5 and 7:25, where this trampling symbolized the desolation of Israel. The yoke is removed literarily at this point as well; after this chapter (and before this in 5:18; 9:3; 10:27; 14:5),
the word ζυγός does not appear again in G except for chapters 40 and 46-47. κῦδος appears only here in G; Seeligmann considered it a remarkably appropriate translation (Seeligmann 1948).
Lord’s resolution(14:26-27)[[@Bible:Isa 14:26-28]]
26 The prophecy ends with a final declaration of Lord Sabaoth’s determination. The two nominatives, Αὕτη ἡ βουλή must form a verbless clause since after the relative clause begins there is no independent finite verb. The subject is the more definite of the two nominatives: the demonstrative pronoun, indicating this (i.e., the preceding prophecy) is the decision that has been made. The same is true for αὕτη ἡ χεὶρ. The upraised hand image has appeared frequently (5:25; 9:11, 16, 20; 10:4) and here it is explained.
27 Lord Sabaoth’s decision cannot be foiled. διασκεδάσει, from διασκεδάζω or διασκεδάννυμι, means scatter to the winds. The rhetorical question is who will thwart (ἀποστρέψει) Lord’s plan?
Foreigners, do not rejoice(14:28-30)[[@Bible:Isa 14:29-30]]
28 A new saying (ῥῆμα) begins in 14:28. In Q, the entirety of the verse is indented within the column. The timing of the saying is indicated by the genitives Τοῦ ἔτους (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.4.9) and οὗ. Ahaz died around 720 bce (Watts 1998, 218).
29 The saying is addressed to foreigners. The etymology of ἀλλόφυλοι is “other-tribe,” and the word generally is used for what is foreign or alien. In the OG, it is used for non-Israelites, especially the Philistines. This is Eusebius’s interpretation; but he noted that their Greek name is Παλαιστίνοι “Palestinians” (1.69). These foreigners are not to be glad (εὐφραίνω). συνετρίβη recalls 14:5, where God shattered the yoke of the sinners. παίω recalls 14:6, where God hit a nation with a blow of his wrath. γάρ provides the reason such joy would be inappropriate (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.5): the crushing of their oppressor’s yoke. But that does sound like a cause for rejoicing. G apparently misunderstood כי to mean γάρ rather than ὅτι, which would mean do not rejoice that the yoke of those striking you has been broken. Eusebius understands the oppressor to be Ahaz (1.69). ὄφις “snake” is used for both נחשׁ and שׂרף in this verse. In 6:2, 6 שׂרף was rendered
σεραφείμ; in 1:7 as πυρίκαυστοι. The reference to ἔκγονα ἀσπίδων recalls 11:8, where the child would put its hand on their bed in peace. The clause τὰ ἔκγονα αὐτῶν ἐξελεύσονται ὄφεις πετόμενοι has two nominatives, even though ἔρχομαι is not a linking verb. The form in which they will go out is expressed by the second nominative, ὄφεις πετόμενοι (πετόμενοι is a literal translation of מְעוֹפֵף). The image is that their descendents will be even more fearsome than the parents.
30 This slithering and venomous race (as Eusebius called them, 1.69, identifying them as evil spirits since they fly through the air) will no longer interfere with the food supply of the poor. The passive forms of βόσκω are used for what the livestock does; the active forms for what the herder does. The referent of αὐτοῦ would seem to be σπέρματος ὄφεων. These words have no counterpart in Hebrew. Διά with the genitive here expresses agency (BDAG, s.v. διά A.4). ἄνδρες is supplied by G; it has no counterpart in Hebrew. The reference to εἰρήνη recalls Isaiah 11. ἐπʼ εἰρήνης (“on” peace) means under the conditions of peace, so “peacefully” rather than “rest in peace,” which to English readers would connote death. ἀναπαύσονται is reprised from 11:2; 13:20, 21; 14:1, 3, 4, 7. The Hebrew root here is the same as in 13:20, 21, but not as in 11:2; 14:1, 3, 4, 7. Two different Hebrew words for killing are behind the two instances of ἀναιρέω. The first recalls 11:4, where the breath of lips would kill the impious. The two phrases τὸ σπέρμα σου and τὸ κατάλειμμά σου are both accusative; if they were nominative, the transitive verb ἀνελεῖ would have no object. σπέρμα appears four times in this chapter, the first time since chapter 1:4, 9. The mention of κατάλειμμα recalls 10:22 and especially 14:22, where κατάλειμμα and σπέρμα were also coordinated. It also anticipates 37:20, where κατάλειμμα and σπείραντες appear together.
Foreigners, take warning(14:31-32)[[@Bible:Isa 14:31-15:1]]
31 The foreigners are warned that a pillaging army is coming from the north, but they will not touch the humble of Zion (14:32). ὀλολύζετε recalls 10:10, where the aorist form is used, and 13:6, where the present is used. The adressees are πύλαι (vocative plural). It is clear that κεκραγέτωσαν is a third person plural active imperative, but it is not clear what the tense is. It has a thematic (connecting) vowel ε, which appears only in the present and second aorist principal parts. Normally the perfect imperative is periphrastic (Smyth 1956a, sec. 599g),
and although inflected perfect imperatives do occur (Smyth 1956a, secs. 697–698), one of the examples from κράζω Smyth provides (κέκραχθι) does not use a thematic vowel, and the other does (κεκράγετε, in Vesp. 415). Of the three possibilities (reduplicated second aorist of κράζω, perfect of κράζω, or a present form of another verb, κεκράγω), the data Smyth provides favours understanding it as a second perfect (with present meaning) of κράζω. See also the discussion at 6:3. The cities are troubled (perfect passive participle of ταράσσω) at the sight of the smoke. Because οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι πάντες cannot be a nominative subject of an imperative, it must be vocative; the addressees are now the foreigners. βορρᾶ is the genitive of βορρᾶς, the colloquial form of βορέας, “north.” The Greek phrase οὐκ ἔστιν τοῦ εἶναι is so awkward that Ottley suggested some words are missing here, or that μεῖναι is the correct reading, from מעמד or לעמד. Silva has “there is no way to live,” with a note: “Gk uncertain” (2007). As the text stands, it expresses the absence of τοῦ εἶναι, which if understood as something that has being as its purpose, would mean what aims at existence does not exist. In context, it would probably be understood that what is needed for existence is not there.
32 The prophecy ends with a rhetorical question and its answer (as Brenton, Ottley, and Silva all have it), although τι could be the object of ἀποκριθήσονται rather than the interrogative pronoun, given the ὅτι clause following. In this case it would mean no different, but would be translated, “And the kings of nations will answer something, (namely) that Lord founded.…” In contrast to the arrogance of the wicked oppressors, it is the humble (ταπεινός recalling 11:4) who will be saved (aorist passive of σῴζω).
The word against Moabitis(15:1-7)[[@Bible:Isa 15:1-2]]
1 The title of the saying against Moabitis is indented from the left margin of the column in Q. The presence of κατά in the title recalls 1:1 (Judea, Jerusalem); 13:1 (Babylon), but even more exactly anticipates 17:1 (Damascus). Moabitis is an adjective referring to the Moabite city or land, with implied feminine singular πόλις or γῆ. Q spells the genitive form here as Μωαβίτιδος, with S and A; Swete spelled it Μωαβείτιδος throughout this chapter; only in 15:4 is it spelled Μωαβείτιδος in S. Richard D. Weis argued that the Moab oracles in Numbers 24; Isaiah 15-16; and Jeremiah 48 have influenced each other as they are preserved in the versions. The later versions (Targum, Peshitta) were more susceptible to such assimilation than the earlier Septuagint (Weis 2010). The saying prophesies the destruction of Moabitis by night (νυκτός), using a genitive of time. The existence of a city wall points to Moabitis being a city rather than a land.
2 Unspecified addressees (as in Isa 14) are instructed to grieve over themselves. The clue to their identity is the “for Lebedon” in apposition to “for yourselves” (ἑαυτοῖς). This place name Λεβηδών (as Ziegler also has it) was is spelled Δαιβηδών in S* and A; this was changed by Sinaiticus corrector cb3 to καὶ Δηβών, which is what Vaticanus has. Delta and lamda are shaped very much alike, and αι and ε are interchangeable, so Ziegler’s reading is very similar to that of S*, and best explains the various other manuscript readings (see Ziegler’s apparatus) (Ziegler 1939, 179). Eusebius wrote καὶ ∆ηβών, a reading shared with Vaticanus and Scb3 (and besides them only 46 88 and Syh). The relative pronoun οὗ is genitive to specify the location (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.4.9), since ἐκεῖ resumes the sentence after the relative clause. The prepositional phrase ἐπὶ Ναβαὺ τῆς Μωαβίτιδος is more likely modifying κλαίειν than it is in apposition to ἐκεῖ, given the earlier parallel λυπεῖσθε ἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς. Now with the mention of Nabau, Moabitis appears to be a land rather than a city, assuming Nabau is a city within Moab.
2 The imperatives continue with ὀλολύζετε. The universal afflictions are baldness and cut arms. φαλάκρωμα recalls 3:24, where the women would have this “baldness” instead of golden head ornamentation. The arms are “cut up” (perfect passive participle of κατατέμνω). Although in classical usage, κατατέμνω results in multiple pieces of the thing cut, in biblical usage, ritual gashing of one’s own arms is meant, as in Lev 2:21; Hosea 7:14; 3 Kingdoms 18:28. Eusebius did not comment on this word.
3 The ritual interpretation of arm-cutting is confirmed by the following expressions of self-abasement. The Moabites are to go into the streets (πλατείαις from πλατύς “broad” ways), and wrap a belt around themselves (περιζώσασθε is from either περιζώννυμι or περιζωννύω). The morphologically nominative form πάντες must be vocative because the verb is imperative.
4 Cities are personified, expressing their dismay. κέκραγεν (which is clearly a perfect form because of its ending –εν) is in parallel with an aorist (see discussion
of the tenses of κράζω at 14:31); the Hebrew form is yiqtol. Q and A read ἐλάλησεν, and Q has a marginal note adding Ἐλεαλή; B has only Ἐλεαλή; S had both until ca corrected it to match Q/A. ἐλάλησεν is absent in B and therefore also Rahlfs & Ziegler. It has no counterpart in the Hebrew, and probably appeared as a Greek scribal error regarding the next word, Ἐλεαλή (the Hebrew is אלעלה, which has nothing to do with speaking). Q and S use the singular αὐτῆς (with A and Ziegler), since only Hesebon is mentioned; B (followed by Rahlfs) has the plural αὐτῶν because Eleale is also mentioned, making the cities plural. Loins cry out, which is not an image one would expect encounter, but other body parts call out in the next verse as well. γνώσεται is an obvious misreading of ירעה, “tremble” as ידעה, “know.”
5 Another body part, the heart, of Moabitis now cries out. The surprising reason for this (as introduced by the γάρ clause) is that she is a three-year-old heifer. G reasonably understood the place-name עגלת שׁלשׁיה as common nouns, “heifer of a third,” resulting in little sense in this context. Eusebius is no help here; he skipped over verses 3-6. This heifer is on the ἀνάβασις “ascent,” so I translate the cognate verb ἀναβήσονται likewise as “ascend.” The function of Ἁρωνιείμ could be genitive (“on the way of Haroneiim it cries out”), which would be parallel to “the ascent toward you,” or nominative (“on the way, Haronieim cries out”). Since the last subject was plural, a change to a singular subject is preferable, to match the singular verb βοᾷ. ΒΟΑ also could be read an imperative βοᾶ, in which case the translation would read “on the ascent toward you, you will ascend weeping on the way of Haronieim: Cry out, Ruin and earthquake!”
6 Swete spelled Νεμρείμ (the reading of Q and Ottley) as Νεμηρείμ, Rahlfs and Ziegler as Νεμριμ, S as Νεβρίμ. Eusebius located the water of Nemrim in the way of the Arabs (1.70).
7 Because the particle μή introduces a question expecting a negative answer, the meaning is that it is impossible for Moab to be saved. Silva has “Even so, will she be saved?” Ottley has “Is she like to be saved, even thus?” The conjunction γάρ is unexpected after a rhetorical question because it usually introduces the reason for an assertion.
The seed of Moab will be taken away(15:7-16:1)[[@Bible:Isa 15:6-16:1]]
7 The reason given for the impossibility of salvation is the speaker’s plan to bring the Arabs (accusative plural of Ἄραψ) upon the ravine. The combination of the ravine (φάραγξ) with waters gives the impression that Nemreim is a river. It is at this point the first person verb endings first appear, with ἐπάξω. Although unspecified, the speaker is most likely Lord. The Arabs are to capture αὐτήν, which because it is feminine singular most naturally refers to the ravine.8 The sounds of distress will extend across the entirety of Moab. Two parallel statements mention the cry reaching two geographical locations. συνάπτω normally indicates two things coming together, in this case the shout and the border, but the border is of course stationary. The noun ὀλολυγμός is cognate with ὀλολύζω, “wail,” “howl.” φρέαρ denotes a well, pit, or shaft. If it is a well-known geographical location, probably a well is meant.9 The disaster is depicted using another image involving water; it is blood-filled. In the phrase τὸ δὲ ὕδωρ τὸ Ῥεμμὼν, Ῥεμμὼν is in the position normally held by an attributive adjective, “the Remmon water,” but alternatively it could be a genitive (“the water of Remmon”) of an indeclinable noun Ῥεμμών. In manuscripts other than S, what appears as two places Δερμών and Νεμμών are the same place: Ῥεμμών in Q and A; Δειμών in B, in which case the γάρ makes more sense. The symbolism of a well filled (πίμπλημι) with blood is two-fold: it is the product of violent death, and it no longer sustains life. The two nouns σπέρμα and κατάλοιπον are in parallel, as are σπέρμα and the cognate κατάλειμμα in 14:22 and 14:30. Even in 1:9 we see the similar expression ἐγκατέλιπεν σπέρμα.1 There are three possibilities for the object of ἀποστελῶ. It could be an implicit object (“I will send things like reptiles…”) or gapped, with the preceding object understood (“I will send them like reptiles”), or the sentence could begin with the preceding καί (“and I will send the remnant of Adama like reptiles…”). This last option is preferable because it provides an object for ἀποστελῶ.Moab will flee(16:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 16:1-4]]
1 The prophecy foresees Moab as fugitives, in contrast to Zion. Μή indicates that the rhetorical question about Zion expects a negative answer; of course Zion is not a deserted rock.
2 The second person singular ἔσῃ comes unexpectedly. The last second person forms were in 15:2-3, but those were plural. Here, the identity of the addressee depends on the interpretation of the “daughter,” which is nominative θυγάτηρ in Q, A, B (followed by Ziegler, as well as in the original hand of S, but changed to vocative by corrector cb3 (followed by Rahlfs). If the nominative is intended rather than the vocative, the daughter is in apposition to the nestling, as something else to which the addressee is compared (“like a nestling and like a daughter of Moab”). However, even if it is nominative in form, the reader likely understood the vocative function because nominative and vocative forms are so often identical. The image used to express Moab’s vulnerability is a baby bird displaced from its nest. The genitive ἀνιπταμένου (from ἀνίπταμαι, a variation of ἀναπέτομαι, “fly away”) matches πετεινοῦ. For ἐπὶ τάδε (the reading of Q*, S, A, and B), Q’s corrector (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has ἔπειτα δέ. The two phrases could be spelled the same. The difference is that ἔπειτα indicates the deliberation should happen subsequently, whereas ἐπὶ τάδε would mean the deliberation should be “upon these things.”
3 Swete and Ziegler place πλείονα at the end of 16:2; Rahlfs places it at the beginning of verse 3. Since πλείονα is the object of βουλεύου, it is preferable to keep it with that verse, as Rahlfs does. Q has ποίει τε as two words, to maintain the singular, as does Ziegler, but S, Swete, and Rahlfs have the plural form ποιεῖτε, which does not match the singular Arnon, the addressee of this imperative. The Arnon is the major river in Moab, flowing into the middle of the east side of the Dead Sea, symbolizing all of Moab. Arnon is to provide a shelter of sorrow (πένθους, genitive of πένθος) for “her” (αὐτῇ). The identification of this feminine singular does not depend on whether the “daughter of Moab” was understood as nominative or vocative. Either way, the daughter of Moab is the closest matching potential referent (closer than the daughter of Zion). ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς (the reading of Marchalianus, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus corrector C) is written the same as the genitive noun ἀπάρχης “of an official,” which makes no sense here. B* has ἀχθῇς and Rahlfs and Ziegler have ἀπαχθῇς, both second person subjunctives functioning as negative imperatives, which are still out of place. Silva translates Ziegler’s ἀπαχθῇς as “do not be taken away.” ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς is much preferable because it parallels διὰ παντός earlier in the verse. Eusebius’s commentary resumes here in 16:3; it omits comment on chapter 15 since 15:2.
4 The river and the Moabites are to shelter each other from the one causing the devastation. The translation of שׁד “destruction” as ἄρχων (16:4) is the result of misreading it as שַׂר, which refers to a commander, because of the similar-looking Hebrew letters Dalet and Resh. Relief is to come when this ruler dies.
David’s throne restored(16:5)[[@Bible:Isa 16:5]]
5 When this ruinous ruler dies, a Davidic ruler is to be restored; his reign will be characterized by legal fairness and righteousness.
The insolence of Moab(16:6)[[@Bible:Isa 16:6-7]]
6 As is typical in Isaiah, the primary crime is an attitude of egotistical arrogance, ὕβρις.
Moab will wail(16:7-10)[[@Bible:Isa 16:6-7]]
7 Swete and Ziegler place οὐχ οὕτως in verse 6, but Rahlfs has them in 16:7. The prophecy warns that such self-promotion will be self-defeating; it will end with wailing. οὐκ is probably the results of misreading Hebrew אל for אך. On the meaning of μελετάω see the commentary on 38:14. Although ἐντραπήσῃ could mean “feel misgiving” (LSJ II. Med. or Pass.), the meaning “feel shame” (LSJ II. 4. Abs.) is more common in the LXX.
8 Heshbon is a town in northern Moab, exemplifying Moab’s fate. She will change from a nation who devours others’ vines to one that has nothing of value. καταπίνοντες translates בלעי (“swallowing down”) instead of the MT בעלי (“lords”). Eusebius said Moab will grieve because their land had become deserted (1.71). Those wandering the wilderness (ἔρημον) are mentioned in the second person, then in the third person. In the latter case, they are also described as those sent (ἀπεσταλμένοι), which translates the Hebrew agricultural word שְׁלֻחוֹת (“offshoots”) literally.
9 Eusebius noted the change to first person verbs, and attributes these words to the prophet, who is so compassionate as to grieve with the Moabites for their fate. He said the fruit and vine symbolism refers to the bloom of youth, which in the Moabites’ case was wasted on partying (1.71).
10 The happiness that will be taken away is exemplified as winemaking.
Moab’s handmade things will not rescue him(16:11-12)[[@Bible:Isa 16:6-7]]
11 According to Eusebius, the distress of the prophet’s body parts (belly and inward parts) illustrates the inner anguish he feels at the Moabites’ fate.
12 The purpose of this distress is to cause the Moabites to feel shame over their idolatrous practices. Eusebius noted that the other translators have εἰς τὸ ἁγίασμα αὐτοῦ “enter its sanctuary” instead of “enter the works of her hands” (1.71).
Moab’s three-year fate(16:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 16:13-17:1]]
13 The prophecy against Moab has an explicit conclusion, followed by one additional comment that the prophecy will be fulfilled within three years. Eusebius, however, showed a preference for the later Greek translations over the Septuagint in their renderings of 16:14 because they have a conjunction between the clause about the hired worker and the clause about the glory of Moab. He therefore applied the three-year time span not to the interval at the end of which the prophecy would be fulfilled, but to the time span over which the prophet prophesied against Moab at various times (1.71).
The word against Damascus(17:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 17:1-3]]
The verb ἀρθήσεται could refer to lifting or removal; the following ἀπό implies removal. πτῶσις normally denotes the state or condition of falling, but here refers to the result of falling, “calamity.”
2 The feminine nominative καταλελειμμένη refers to Damascus. The preposition εἰς κοίτην indicates what Damascus will become: a place where flocks sleep. Q and uncials other than S have οὐκ rather than οὐκέτι, i.e., without the implication that there was previously a pursuer.
The glory of Jacob will fail(17:4)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
4 The words Τάδε λέγει Κύριος Σαβαώθ are in verse 3 in Rahlfs. The paragraph division in Q matches that of Swete and Ziegler. The “day” referred to is when Damascus is brought down. Eusebius said Damascus and the dignity of those of the circumcision were destroyed at the same time (1.72).
The extent of the failing(17:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
6 Because ἄκρος designates an extremity, and μετέωρος raising, this combination refers to the tips of the tree’s highest branches. Eusebius, Dem. ev. 2.3 saw the fulfilment of this prophecy in the transfer of God’s favour from Israel to the believers, and in the conversion of idolators to the living God. He wrote, “By this it is clearly promised that the glory of Israel and all her riches will be taken away, and only a few, who like the few berries on an olive branch can be counted easily, will be left. These are the ones who believe in the Lord. Just after this there is a prophecy of the entire human race turning away from the error of idolatry and recognizing the God of Israel.”
They will trust in the Holy One of Israel(17:6-11)[[@Bible:Isa 17:6-8]]
8 Rather than the altars and handmade objects in which they had previously trusted, Q and S indicate that the idolators will instead place their trust in the Holy One of Israel; A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) do not include ἀλλ᾿ ἔσονται πεποιθότες ἐπὶ τὸν ἅγιον τοῦ Ἰσραήλ.
9 Because the expression ἀπὸ προσώπου follows a Hebrew idiom (meaning presence) that is foreign to non-biblical Greek, I translate it with the equally striking English “face.”
The unfaithful seed will blossom(17:11)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
11 The phrase κληρώσῃ τοῖς υἱοῖς σου has no equivalent in the Hebrew. For κληρώσῃ (the reading also of A, B, papyrus 965, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has κλήρωσιν.
Woe to many nations(17:12-14)[[@Bible:Isa 17:12-14]]
12 Although BDAG’s entry on πολύς indicates that “great” could be an appropriate English gloss when modifying a plural noun such as ἐθνῶν πολλῶν, the sense of “great” would not be that of the English “great nations,” which implies something about the nation’s size, reputation, influence, or glory. Rather, the meaning is more like the English “a great number of nations,” as in ὕδατα πολλά (a great amount of water, John 3:23) or κτήματα πολλά (a great amount/number of possessions, Mark 10:22), or as in ὄχλοι πολλοί (a great number of people, Matt 4:25). The verb ἠχέω is used for the production of any sound; when water is the subject, “roar” is appropriate in English, but the specific connotation of roaring referring to animal sounds is not in the Greek.
13 The adverb πόρρω is as ambiguous as the English “far.” It could describe the extent of the pursuit, the location of the pursuit, or the distance between the pursuer and the pursued. Brenton and Ottley both have “afar.” Q is unique in having the plural genitive participle λικμώντων match the genitive ἀχύρων in number; in S, A, B (Rahlfs and Ziegler, it is a genitive absolute ἀχύρου (Porter 1992, sec. 10.2.1).
14 Jerome commented (5.17.12-14) that the historical fulfilment of this verse (Sennachereim) is preferable to seeing the fulfilment by the Romans, by Christ, by the Jews’ rejection of Jesus, and by the persecution of the church.
Woe to the land beyond Ethiopia(18:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 18:1-3]]
1 Οὐαί normally takes a dative, but here it has the vocative πτέρυγες; the “wings” are being addressed, not the genitive γῆς. The meaning of wings of a land of ships is obscure. Eusebius resorts to finding his interpretation in the next verse, especially in the translations of Symmachus and Aquila, who speak of emissaries (ἀποστέλλων ἀποστόλους). He finds fulfilment of this prophecy in what Paul implies in Acts 28:21-22: that Jews all over the world had been warned about Christians. The “wings” are described as being beyond (ἐπέκεινα) Ethiopia. Cyril of Alexandria commented about this land beyond Ethiopia, and he found the historical referent in the time of Isaiah: “At certain times the Israelites foolishly abandoned God the Savior of all and fell into the error of worshiping many gods.… The Israelites, in particular those living in Jerusalem, had approached the Egyptians and pleaded with them to become allies. They
needed their support because they were being invaded by the Babylonians.” These Egyptians were the ones trodden down by their devotion to idols.
2 Unlike Symmachus, G calls those sent ὅμηρα, hostages. The preposition ἐν could be understood to denote either the means or the destination of the sending. The parallel ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος indicates the means is the preferable interpretation. The messengers mentioned in other manuscripts (S, A, B, papyrus 965, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) are absent in Q, leaving κοῦφοι, “nimble,” to function substantively despite being anarthrous. The receiving nation is μετέωρον, “lofty,” but also harsh (χαλεπόν). The repeated use of ἐπέκεινα recalls 18:1. Hippolytus Antichr. 58-59 cited 18:1-2 as a prediction that the people would try to attack the people of God through a mortal man who would send letters to the saints, commanding them to cut them all off everywhere.
The rivers’ territory will be inhabited(18:2-5)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
2 Hippolytus identified the Christians as those who “are persecuted and trodden down” by those unbelievers. The “wings of the vessels” are the churches; the “sea” is the world, in which the Church is set, like a ship with Christ as her Pilot.
3 There is no verb to match the subject οἱ ποταμοί, so this could be part of a verbless clause, or a vocative, or a nominative absolute. The third person αὐτῶν would not be expected if this were a vocative. The following series of ὡς phrases belong together, since they have similar syntax, beginning with the comparator and ending with the verb (with subject, if it is explicit). The nominative ἡ χώρα αὐτῶν could be the subject of the preceding κατοικηθήσεται or the following ἀρθῇ.
4 The first person pronoun μοι referring to the prophet is unusual. The adverb οὕτως indicates that the content of the speech is about to be reported. Imagery of the genitives καύματος (heat), μεσημβρίας (midday), and δρόσου (dew) symbolize the pervasive ubiquity of the security Lord provides. The Hebrew behind harvest (ἀμήτου) is קציר.
5 The Hebrew קציר appears again, but this time G translates θερισμοῦ. Both ἄμητος and θερισμός can refer to either the time or the product of harvesting.
Lord will prune before harvest(18:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
5 ὄμφαξ denotes an unripe, sour grape, but is also used more generally for immaturity. Both the noun and verb forms of both words are used in the phrase ὄμφαξ ἀνθήσει ἄνθος ὀμφακίζουσα. βοτρύδια are clusters; the lexicons LSJ and LEH offer “little clusters” as a gloss, in which case the adjective μικρά is redundant.
The pruning hook used to prune the vine is a δρέπανον, and a branch that will be cut off (future of κατακόπτω) is κληματίς.
6 The object changes from plural αὐτούς to singular αὐτόν.
Gifts brought to Lord Sabaoth(18:7)[[@Bible:Isa 18:7]]
7 The only finite verb in 18:7 is ἀνενεχθήσεται. τεθλιμμένου is the perfect passive participle of θλίβω; τετιλμένου is the perfect passive participle of τίλλω, meaning “pluck” (especially pulling out feathers or hair). Although λαοῦ refers to the same two people in both cases, the preposition changes from ἐκ λαοῦ to ἀπὸ λαοῦ. This expression μεγάλου ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον seems out of place between two descriptions of how troubled the nation is. The phrase ἔθνος ἐλπίζον καὶ καταπεπατημένον recalls 18:2; in S, the two phrases are identical (ἔθνος ἀνέλπιστον καὶ καταπεπατημένον). The geopgraphical use of μέρος indicates a region or district of land. The reappearance of ποταμοῦ recalls 18:1, where the rivers were plural.
A vision of Egypt(19:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 19:1-4]]
1 The adjective κοῦφος has a double meaning in Greek: both swift, and lightweight; in G, speed is the primary meaning. Chrysostom quoted Isaiah 19:1 to show that God always appears out of a cloud (Homilies on Matthew 56.5 when describing the Father’s voice from the cloud in the transfiguration in Matt 17:5; Homilies on Acts 2, explaining why a cloud received Jesus at his ascension). Cyril likewise interpreted chapter 19 as referring to the conversion of Egypt from idolatry to faith in God. The “swift cloud” might mean the Lord’s body, the blessed Virgin [Jerome, Homilies on the Psalms 11 (on Psalm 77) and Psalm 24 (on Psalm 96)], but Cyril preferred to understand the cloud as Christ. He played with the double meaning of “swift” and “light/buoyant,” comparing the ability of human minds to lose their heavy burdens and go upward (Wilken 2007, 195). Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on χειροποίητος (Croughs 2001). Tertullian said Egypt refers to the superstitions of the whole world (Adv. Jud. 9). Similarly, Theodoret quoted Hippolytus from his discourse on the beginning of Isaiah: “He likens the world to Egypt; its idolatry, to images; its removal and destruction to an earthquake. The Word he calls the ‘Lord’ and by a ‘swift cloud’ he means the right pure tabernacle enthroned on which our Lord Jesus Christ entered into life to undo the fall” (NPNF2 3:177). Theodoret, in his letter 151 to the Monks of the Euphratensian, the Osrhoene,
Syria, Phoenicia, and Cilicia quoted 19:1 “He shakes the idols of Egypt” to refer to Jesus’ divine nature even during his escape to Egypt. In his commentary he wrote, “The facts confirm the prophecy. The error of polytheism was extinguished, and the one who rides on a swift cloud is worshiped by the Egyptians” (Wilken 2007, 196). The verb ἡττάομαι normally means be inferior, i.e., overcome. Eusebius interpreted the phrase ἀπὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ to that mean an invisible power will cause the hearts to be dismayed (1.73). He argued that the Jews cannot point to a time when this prophecy was fulfilled, since Egypt did not forsake idolatry until they adopted Christianity (Dem. ev. 6.20; 8.5; 9.2).
2 The noun νομός is not to be mistaken for νόμος (custom, law), but district or province, especially of Egypt (see Herodotus 2.4; Diodorus Siculus 1.54). The sentiment of 19:2 is reminiscent of Isaiah 3:5 καὶ συμπεσεῖται ὁ λαός, ἄνθρωπος πρὸς ἄνθρωπον καὶ ἄνθρωπος πρὸς τὸν πλησίον αὐτοῦ· προσκόψει τὸ παιδίον πρὸς τὸν πρεσβύτην, ὁ ἄτιμος πρὸς τὸν ἔντιμον, but verb is different, and the preposition is lacking here. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on ἐπεγερθήσονται (2001, 84). Matt 24:7, Mark 13:8, and Luke 21:10 allude to Isa 19:2. They all have the same relevant phrase: ἐγερθήσεται ἔθνος ἐπὶ ἔθνος καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν, the only difference is that Matthew and Mark insert γάρ as the second word.
3
Egypt ruled by harsh kings(19:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
3 The English word ventriloquist etymologically means “belly-speaker” in Latin, and that is also the origin of the Greek word ἐγγαστρίμυθος (spelled ἐνγαστριμύθους by the original hand of Q). An ancient ventriloquist was a religious authority; she would interpret the sounds made by her digestive system, where it was thought the spirits of the dead dwelt. The earliest mention of ventriloquism is by the Pythia (Oracle) at Delphi. Eurycles of Athens was the most famous gastromancer. The verb ἐπερωτήσουσιν is used without the accusative of the thing asked, corresponding to “consult” or “inquire of.” The noun ἄγαλμα is used for glory, or a pleasing gift, but more specifically for a statue. The phrase τοὺς ἐκ τῆς γῆς φωνοῦντας recalls 8:19. The Hebrew verb is the same in both verses, but there the Greek verbs were forms of ζητέω.
4 The first-person verb παραδώσω continues the speech from 19:3. The instance of κυρίων is a rare instance of this word not referring to Lord. σκληρῶν recalls Isaiah 8, where this adjective appears three times. The series of plural genitives
ἀνθρώπων κυρίων σκληρῶν could be read two ways. κυρίων σκληρῶν could either be in apposition with ἀνθρώπων, or qualifying ἀνθρώπων. In other words, either the people are harsh masters, or have harsh masters.
Egyptian rivers will fail(19:4-8)
5 Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on καὶ πίονται οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ὕδωρ (Croughs 2001, 85). Drinking water from next to the sea would be brackish and salty, but the Egyptians would have no options because the river will have given out, ἐκλείπω, a word typically referring to coming to the end of one’s existence for lack resources, i.e., giving up, failing, or vanishing.
6 The original hand of Q (as well as S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) wrote διώρυγες; Q’s corrector and B read the form διώρυχες (from διῶρυξ, “canal”), which appears in Herodotus 2.108, 138; Xenophon Anabasis 1.7.15. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on πᾶσα συναγωγὴ ὕδατος (Croughs 2001, 87). A συναγωγή can refer to any gathering; ἕλος is marshy ground.
7 The Egyptian word ἄχι (also ἄχελ) refers to a reed-grass used for lamp wicks. Croughs discussed the intertextual influences on τὸ ἄχι (2001, 87), κύκλῳ τοῦ ποταμοῦ (2001, 88), and ἀνεμόφθορον (2001, 89). The word κύκλῳ can function as adverb or preposition. When it has an accusative or genitive following, it functions as a preposition. Tov noted that the preposition διά was added before τοῦ ποταμοῦ “in accordance with the rules of the Greek language or translational habits” (The Parallel Aligned Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Texts of Jewish Scripture). Usually the root *φθορ carries the sense of corruption or ruin.
8 The occupation of those who are expressing their discontent (στενάζω) is ἁλιεύς, which refers to those who work on the sea, typically as a fisher, as the context here confirms. Although Q, S and A have the singular ἄγκιστρον “fish-hook,” B has the plural ἄγκιστρα. There is some variation in the tense as well. Q, A, and B have the present; S has the aorist. The meaning is the same, but the present is expected. In the next clause, we have the present, with a plural object. The form σαγήνας is the plural accusative of σαγήνη, a dragnet. An ἀμφιβολεύς is one who uses an ἀμφίβληστρον, a kind of fish-net that is cast, as in Mark 1:16. These are prophesied to experience sadness (future of πενθέω).
The skillful and wise will be undone(19:9–12)[[@Bible:Isa 17:4-6]]
9 λίνον refers to anything made of flax (linen), whether lamp-wick or fishing net or line (as in Mark 1:18). βύσσος similarly refers to flax and the linen made
from it. The adjective σχιστός normally means “divided.” The fishing connotations may have come to the reader’s mind, in the context of the previous verse, and according to Muraoka this is a torn fishing net. But the upcoming parallel is may point to to the flax plant rather than to fishing lines. LSJ identifies λίνον σχιστόν as “lint” in Hippocrates, but “fine flax” in Isa 19:9, as does LEH. Eusebius lumps together the workers of the two materials, split flax and linen.
10 Instead of ζῦθον (the reading of Q, A, B, S corrector cb2, followed by Rahlfs), the original hand of S reads ζυγόν, and Ziegler has ζῦτον. Greek gamma and tau are visually similar. ζῦθον and ζῦτον are alternate spellings for Egyptian barley beer. Note that the contract vowel in πονέω does not undergo lengthening in later Greek (LSJ).
11 Because μωρός is an adjective that could have a substantival function, the translation “will be fools” would also convey the same point. Τάνις was a town in lower Egypt. This nominative phrase οἱ σοφοὶ σύμβουλοι taken in context, is hanging independently (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.1.5). Grammatically, it could be understood as a verbless clause on its own,or in apposition to the leaders, or resumed by αὐτῶν. No matter how the constituents are related, the meaning is the same: the leaders of Tanis are foolish even though they think themselves wise and are misleading the king. Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on συνετῶν (Croughs 2001, 90). Athough the expected preposition before ἀρχῆς would be ἀπ’, we find ἐξ instead. ἀρχή can refer to leadership or beginning; here it translates קדם.
12 Paul in 1 Cor 1:20 alluded to Isa 19:11-12, without using the exact words: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; ποῦ συζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
Egyptian leaders will fail(19:13-15)[[@Bible:Isa 19:12-15]]
13 The Hebrew שׂרי behind ἄρχοντες clearly refers to leadership rather than beginning.
14 Although πλανᾶται could be understood as middle or passive (with an external agent), because πλανάω appeared in the preceding verse in the active voice, it is preferable to see an external agent here as well, therefore I translate “led astray”
rather than “go astray.” Although the topic is similar, it is not entirely clear that 1 Timothy 4:1 alludes to Isa 19:14, with its ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως προσέχοντες πνεύμασιν πλάνοις καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων. Where the other manuscripts (S, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have ἐμῶν, the first-hand of Q wrote αμων; Q’s reading was later corrected to αιμων.
15 Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on κεφαλὴν καὶ οὐρὰν καὶ ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος (2001, 91); though note that Q does not precede ἀρχὴν with καὶ. Although ἀρχή can refer to leadership or beginning, here it translates כפה, a shoot of reeds.
Egyptians will fear Judeans(19:16-17)[[@Bible:Isa 19:16-17]]
16 Croughs discussed the intertextual influence on ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἐν τρόμῳ (2001, 92); Q does not have ἐν preceding τρόμῳ.
17 Although it has been suggested that Luke 21:11 alludes to Isa 19:17 with its σεισμοί τε μεγάλοι καὶ κατὰ τόπους λιμοὶ καὶ λοιμοὶ ἔσονται, φόβητρά τε καὶ ἀπʼ οὐρανοῦ σημεῖα μεγάλα ἔσται, the similarity involves only one lexical item, φόβητρον / φόβητρα. The relationship is not one of literary dependence. The commentaries of Cyril and Theodoret explain that the “terror” is the reverence and awe that Egyptians of their day had toward the places Jesus lived (Wilken 2007, 195).
Egyptian cities swear by Lord(19:18)[[@Bible:Isa 19:18]]
18 The reading of Q, A, B (Rahlfs, Ziegler) πόλις ἁσεδέκ, is orthographically compatible with Sinaiticus scribe cb3’s πόλεις ἁσεδέκ. The earliest reading of S was Πόλις Ἁσεδηλίου; the change to Πόλις Ἁσε (by corrector ca) was followed by cb3’s change to πόλεις ἁσεδέκ. The MT has עִ֣יר הַהֶרֶס; Qumran (1QIsaa and 4Q56) has עיר החרס. Aquila and Theodotion have αρες, and Symmachus translated the same, חרס, as “sun.” Vaccari concluded that G read קיר הסדח where his Vorlage actually had קיר הסרח (Vaccari 1921). Ασεδ is from חסד, from the same three characters as חרס, but with a visual misreading and a transposition. A plausible explanation of the development of the variants is as follows: The original Hebrew was החרס (Qumran, Symmachus); G read חסד and wrote ασεδ; Symmachus read חרס and wrote ηλιου; Aquila and Theodotion read הרס or חרס and wrote αρες; ασεδκληθήσεται (in A, B) became ασεδεκκληθησεται when dictated; it also became ασεδηλιουκαικληθησεται when Sinaiticus or its ancestor conflated the Old Greek ασεδ with
Symmachus’s ηλιου. The MT read החרס as ההרס. In his explanation of Isa 11:15, Eusebius said the Egyptians would give up their superstitions and “swear by the name of the Lord,” quoting 19:18 (Comm. Isa. 1.64). On 19:18, he said Egyptians now swear in Chananite when they use the Hebrew words “alleluia and amen and Sabbath and such others as are found in the divine Scripture,” and when they swear it is to the Lord of hosts. The five cities are five divisions in the Church: the bishops, elders, deacons, the enlightened, and those present in the one city, named Asedek “righteousness,” which is the Church. The Hebrew is Areopolis, so it should be “the one city will be called the city of the earth” (Comm. Isa. 1.76). He referred to these cities being divisions again in Comm. Isa. 2.23. In Onomasticon, Eusebius again wrote, “in Hebrew this name should be written Aares which is dryness and some interpret ‘in the sun,’ but others translate ‘in the clay’ probably designating either Heliopolis or Ostracinas” (GCS 11,1.38; trans. Wolf).
An Egyptian altar to Lord(19:19-22)[[@Bible:Isa 19:19-20]]
20 For the form κεκράξονται see the discussion in Isa 6. Eusebius saw the mention of “Savior” as a reference to Jesus, since he claimed that is what Jesus means in Hebrew. Lactantius (Inst. 4.13; Epit. 44) quoted 19:20 to say that Jesus was a man: “And God shall send to them a man, who shall save them, shall save them by judging.” Theodotus (Excerpts 16) quoted the same verse to argue that God shows his power (cures, prophecies, signs) through the agency of men. Cyril commented that the “pillar” was a church or a replica of the cross, and the “altar” referred to the Christian altars all over Egypt (Wilken 2007, 196). Theodoret said the singular “pillar” is used because it refers to the Church throughout the whole world (quoting 1 Tim 3:15 and Matt 16:18), but the singular refers to many altars and houses of prayer. However, Jerome mentioned a different fulfilment, one that is taken up by recent interpreters of Greek Isaiah (van der Kooij 1987; Kim 2009):
During the conflict between Antiochus the Great and the generals of Ptolemy, Judea, which lay between them, was rent into contrary factions, the one group favoring Antiochus and the other favoring Ptolemy. Finally the high priest, Onias, fled to Egypt, taking a large number of Jews along with him, and he was given by Ptolemy an honorable reception. He then received the region known as Heliopolis, and by a grant of the king, he erected a temple in Egypt like the temple of the Jews, and it remained standing up until the reign of Vespasian, over a period of 250 years.… For Onias affirmed that he was fulfilling the prophecy written by Isaiah: “There shall be an altar of the Lord in Egypt, and the name [inscription] of the
Lord shall be found in their territories.” And so this is the matter referred to in this passage: “The sons of the transgressors of your people,” who forsook the law of the Lord and wished to offer blood sacrifices to God in another place than what he had commanded. They would be lifted up in pride and would boast that they were fulfilling the vision, that is, the thing that the Lord had enjoined. But they shall fall to ruin, for both temple and city shall be afterwards destroyed (Comm. Dan. 3.11.146).
21 The noun εὐχή can refer to a vow (where a promise is made by the suppliant) or more generally to prayers where no such promise is made. The verb ἀποδίδωμι refers to fulfilling obligations, restoring things to they way they ought to be. The combination of εὐχή and ἀποδίδωμι indicates vows are in view.
22 Where Q and A have ἐπακούσεται, Sinaiticus scribe B originally wrote the plural εἰσακούσονται but corrected it to the singular εἰσακούσεται (the reading also of B and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
Egyptians will serve the Assyrians(19:23)[[@Bible:Isa 19:23]]
23 Although in the last two paragraphs, the demonyms (Egyptians and Assyrians) all had articles, in this paragraph none of them except the last two have articles in Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); S and B lack an article for the last instance of Egyptians; in the same paragraph Eusebius once agreed with S and once with A). Eusebius identified the Assyrians with the Syrians (Antiochus and Demetrius), and the Egyptians with the Ptolemaic empire. Because these two empires had historically never had fellowship and interrelations between them, Eusebius considered this a prophecy of the peace that would obtain after the arrival (ἄφιξις) of the Lord (1.77).
Israel a peer of Egyptians and Assyrians(19:24-25)[[@Bible:Isa 19:24-25]]
24 Justin Martyr swapped the order of τρίτος and Ἰσραὴλ when he quoted
19:24 to the effect that there will be another Israel (the people of Christ); Q reflects this transposition. He then wrote, “Since then God blesses this people, and calls them Israel, and declares them to be His inheritance, how is it that you repent not of the deception you practise on yourselves, as if you alone were the Israel, and of execrating the people whom God has blessed?” (Dial. 123). He also alluded to this blessing in Dial. 125. The transposition of Egyptians and Assyrians in B (and Q) is an example of why Vaticanus is considered hexaplaric.
25 G read the Hebrew differently than the MT. He read the masculine passive ברוך where we have ברכה. He read the singular ברך for ברכו. He put a relative and a preposition at the beginning of מצרים and אשׁור and ignored all but the conjunction of ומעשׂה ידי. These few changes alter the meaning drastically. Croughs (2010, 367) pointed her readers to Baer (Baer 2001, 230); L. Mongsengwo-Pasinya (Monsengwo-Pasinya 1985, 198–207); and van der Kooij (van der Kooij 1987, 156).
The year Tanathan siezed Azotos(20:1–2)
1 At first glance, the name Ταναθάν might appear to be accusative, but once the prepositional phrase is read, the nominative makes more sense. The particle ἡνίκα introduces a clause indicating the time.
Isaiah goes naked and barefoot(20:2)
2 Isaiah is ordered to ἄφελε (imperative of ἀφαιρέω), “remove” his sackcloth and ὑπόλυσαι (middle imperative of ὑπολύω) his sandals so that he will be ἀνυπόδετος (a variant spelling of ἀνυπόδητος) “barefoot.” The meaning of γυμνός, the standard translation of עָרוֹם, is not necessarily totally naked, according to BDAG (which categorizes Isa 20:2 as lightly clad) and GELS (which says, “Γυμνός does not necessarily mean ‘stark-naked’ but ‘scantly clad’: one wearing only χιτών ‘tunic, undergarment’ may still be described as γ.: see LSJ, s.v. 5 and LSG s.v., and cf. γ. καὶ ἀνυπόδετος Isa 20.2 (with no sackcloth round one’s waist), ~ὴ καὶ ἀσχημονοῦσα Ez 16.7, and descriptive of a defeated nation being taken into captivity Isa 20.4; ἀμφίασιν ~ῶν ‘clothes of…’ Job 22.6.”). Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 2.11) cited 20:2 in support of his argument not to be concerned with clothing. Origen (Cels. 7.7) referred to the same verse as an example of the biography of a prophet. Chrysostom (Hom. Matt. 18, on Matt 5:40) also cited 20:2 when commenting on Jesus’ command to “let him have your cloak also” (Matt 5:40), to say that going without clothing for the sake of God’s command is no disgrace. The reading ποίησον is shared with A, B, and S corrector ca
who changed from ποιησεν, which is the only attestation of that reading. Rahlfs and Ziegler have ἐποίησεν with the MT and no Greek manuscript support.
Isaiah’s nakedness explained(20:3–6)
3 Instead of ἔτη, the reading of Q, A, and adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler, S has the uncorrected mistake ἔτης (αἰτῇς was meant). B has ἔτη, τρία ἔτη. Q, A, S corrector ca (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read the plural σημεῖα; the first-hand of Sinaiticus wrote the singular σημεῖον; B has εἰς σημεῖα. The parallel τέρατα is plural.
4 καλύπτω means cover, and ἀνακαλύπτω means uncover, which fits the symbolic behaviour.
5 Because ἡττάομαι does not normally take ἐπί (which here translates the preposition מ), ἐπί should be understood to modify αἰσχυνθήσονται rather than ἡττηθέντες. One of G’s favorite words, πεποιθότες, here translates מבט, “hope.” The vocabulary choice δόξα is readily explainable as a literal translation of תפארת. How this would have been undersood by a Greek reader is harder to answer. The prototypical meaning “opinion” in classical Greek is not obvious in this context; here it would have been understood perhaps in the sense of “honour,” i.e., the Egyptians increased in reputation by their association with the Ethiopians. Eusebius said Isaiah’s willingness to go naked shows that he did not care about δόξα among humans.
6 The phrase τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ is a literal translation of האי הזה. The phrase κατοικοῦντες ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ appears again in 23:2 (but without ταύτῃ) and 23:6. The island is Egyptian, since the inhabitants of the island say they had been “trusting,” which is what the Egyptians were doing in 20:5. The temple islands of Elephantine or Philae come to mind, especially in the context of their southern neighbour. Instead of ἠδύναντο, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has the imperfect ἐδύναντο.
The word of the desert(21:1–4)
1 In verse 1 we immediately see a change from plural storms to singular. The Hebrew yam is omitted in Q’s first-hand, S, A, B, (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but Q’s marginalia adds τῆς θαλάσσης; perhaps “wilderness of the sea” was changed to “wilderness” because G thought wildernesses only belonged on land. Or it is possible that he had in mind the fulfillment of the prophecy on land. It is not likely he had a specific storm in mind, considering the verb is
optative (διέλθοι); the optative only appears seven times in G. Notably, both מדבר and נגב become ἔρημος “desert.” But this is not an intentional change of meaning, since ἔρημος is the second most common rendering of Negev in the Pentateuch. The adjective φοβερόν “fearsome” is neuter, so it is taken with τὸ ὅραμα (20:2) rather than καταιγίς. The use is not adverbial because that would make the καί in verse 2 awkward. G changed what it modifies from “land” to “vision.” This is reasonable since the translator was working through the text sequentially; evidently he thought the sentence ended with ארץ, so he began his next with נוראה חזות, a predicative order for adjectives. Now that he understood the adjective predicatively, he had to add the article to his translation.
2 Without the article, the adjective σκληρόν should be predicative, so the finite verb ἀνηγγέλη must be part of a separate clause. In verse two, ἀθετέω is translated as expected from בגד, but שדד more often becomes ἀπόλλυμι (four times) in Isaiah rather than ἀνομέω. It is possible that he was guessing at the meaning of this word, since it does not occur in the Pentateuch. An ambiguous word, עלי, which is pointed as an imperative “Go up!” in the Masoretic text, was reasonably misread as “upon me.” Apparently the translator did not have a reading tradition to guide him in vocalizing this word. Only once (40:9) did he understand the seventy occurances of this consonant cluster as an imperative. This interpretation will have significant consequences for his rendering of the rest of the verse. He has a preposition and a subject, but no verb, then he encounters what he takes to be another noun (mistaking the waw for a yod) in the construct state, and renders צירים as πρέσβεις, just as he does in Isaiah 57:9. The Medes become the Persians, just as they do in Jeremiah 32:25. Reaching the end of the clause, and still without a verb, he supposes the sense is that they are coming, so repeats the “upon me” and adds ἔρχονται. As is typical in Greek Isaiah, nations are referred to using the plural of their inhabitants, Elamites, rather than Elam. πρέσβεις is an early synonym of πρεσβευτής, which normally indicates advanced age, but in the context of a nation indicates agents or commissioners. Gregory of Nazianzus (On The Holy Spirit, Theological Oration 5[31].3) quoted 21:2 “Let the treacherous deal treacherously, let the transgressor transgress” to refer to those who deny the Holy Spirit a place in the Trinity. He wrote, “We shall preach what we know” without fear. Also he quoted “the heedless is heedless and the lawless man acts lawlessly” in reference to human obstinacy despite God’s correction (Oration [16].11). The reading Ἐλαμῖται (Q, S) was changed by S corrector cb3 to Ἐλαμεῖται (as also in A, B); Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it Αιλαμῖται.
2 G turned the Hebrew כל, “all” into νῦν, “now,” perhaps reading כן rather than כל. The Hebrew word for “loins” is plural, but this is changed to singular for good Greek.
3 The first person verbs are on the lips of the person who received the vision, and upon whom are the Elamites and the Persians (21:2). His loins are filled (aorist passive of ἐμπίπλημι), but not with any power, rather ἔκλυσις, which denotes loss of force. Instead of the accusative τό (the reading also of S, A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) B has τοῦ, indicating the purpose rather than the manner of being hasty.
4 In verse four, the qatal becomes the present tense “wander” and “immerse.” The active form πλανᾶται means to cause to stray, and the passive to stray, so πλανάω is a reasonable rendering of תעה. G did not know what to do with פַּלָּצוּת so called in ἀνομία, as he tends to do when at a loss. He also apparently did not know what to do with בעת and figured the similar-sounding “bapt” would be a good substitute. The Hebrew נשף was certainly read as נפש, becoming ἡ ψυχή; חִשְׁקִי was then slightly redundant, and was omitted. This inner being (ψυχή) stands, contemporary with the speech; the use of ἐφίστημι is intransitive, a perfect form referring to the “present” time, matching the present tense verbs. Surprisingly, Eusebius did not comment on the combination of baptism with commands to eat and drink. The only other two writers to mention 21:4 are Theodoret, who commented on this verse in his Interpretatio in Esaiam, and Jerome, who mentioned it in his Commentary on Daniel 2.5.
Babylon has fallen!(21:5–9)
5 In place of the singular ἑτοίμασον of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the plural ἑτοιμάσατε which better matches the following plural imperatives. The reason for preparing the table is not as clear as the reason for preparing the shields. G ignored צָפֹה הַצָּפִית. The reason is not readily apparent. It is possible that he did not understand the word, so omitted it, but this is not likely if he was familiar with Exodus, where it appears dozens of times, usually translated as a compound of –χρυσ-. He understood the string of infinitive absolutes as imperatives, and changed the imperative string to a participle and imperative, for Greek style. But there is no apparent reason why he changed the singular of imperatives “eat” “drink” to plurals unless he did identify
them as infinitive absolutes. No reason for reversing the order of eating and drinking is apparent. The reappearance of ἄρχοντες recalls the address to the leaders in 13:2; almost always in Isaiah ἄρχων is a negative label (e.g., 1:23; 16:4).
6 The participle βαδίσας is dependent on the imperative στῆσον, giving an attendent circumstance, so both are translated into English as commands. The reflexive σεαυτῷ refers to the one being commanded, hence the translation “yourself”; it modifies στῆσον rather than βαδίσας. He is to go, and to set up a σκοπόν, “watch-person.” The verb ἀναγγέλλω normally takes the content of what is reported or announced in the accusative case (usually neuter), and the person to whom it is reported in the dative case. Here the object is masculine accusative, so the watchperson is to announce whomever he sees. G fell victim to a misunderstanding that had significant consequences for his translation of the rest of the oracle. He apparently translated the לך twice, the first time as the imperative לֵךְ, becoming Βαδίσας, then then again as לְךָ, becoming σεαυτῷ. He reasonably understood this לְךָ to refer to the person who was to become the watcher, as in “set yourself as a watchman.” Since he understood the watchman to be the prophet, so he changed the 3rd person יִרְאֶה to the 2nd person ἴδῃς, and likewise, the 3rd person יַגִּיד to a 2nd person imperative. Gregory Nazianzen claimed to take the role of a “watcher,” announcing the disobedience of his people (Oration [16].16).
7 Although at first glance it would seem more natural to take εἶδον as a first person singular, this could be third person plural. The plural noun ἱππεῖς (not ἵππος horse but ἱππεύς horseman) could be nominative or accusative, but ἀναβάτας is already an accusative, so nominative is preferable, unless either ἀναβάτης or ἱππεύς is an adjective, or the two nouns are in apposition. Ottley has “I saw two mounted horsemen,” and Silva translated, “I saw two riding horsemen,” both treating ἀναβάτης as an adjective. The accusative ἀκρόασιν πολλὴν is more like an adverbial accusative than a direct object, hence the translation, “listen to a long recitation.” In G’s translation, the
watchman continues to be the prophet, so now the verbs become 1st person rather in Greek than 3rd person as they are in Hebrew. The word vocalized as רֶכֶב in the Masoretic tradition was read as רֹכֵב.
8 The imperative of καλέω with the prepositional phrase is used in the sense of summoning or appointing. The initial aleph of the word vocalized as Arieh in the Masoretic Text and read as Ouria by G was likely originally a ה, i.e., הָרֹאה, according to the Qumran Great Isaiah Scroll. Here, the continued identification of the prophet as the watchman caused even the 3rd person וַיִּקְרָא to be changed to a 2nd person imperative. This move required Ouria to become the object rather than the subject of the verb. The מִצְפֶּה was reasonably understood to be in the construct state, resulting in Κύριος in the genitive rather than vocative. When G finally encountered an explicit first person subject pronoun אָנֹכִי, he realized he needed to change to the first person, so he added the third person εἶπεν to introduce the first-person speech. The reading καί where B has Κύριος can be explained if Κύριος were written as a nominum sacrum Κ̅Ϲ̅, which resembles ΚΕ. The reading of Q, S, A (without Κύριος) means the (third-person) speaker must be Ourias. The implied noun with διὰ παντός is time, so the meaning is “throughout.” The word that is a present participle עֹמֵד in the Masoretic text was reasonably read as a qatal form עָמַד, and therefore became an aorist indicative. Interestingly, but expectedly, both עמד and נצב are rendered as ἔστην. The reading ἐγώ (S, B) represents the Hebrew אנכי; it is absent in Q, A, and the editions of Rahlfs and Ziegler.
9 The subject is made redundantly emphatic by αὐτός. Because συνωρίς is a pair of horses, the “rider” must have been a charioteer. The two wayyiqtols were changed to a participle and aorist indicative, for Greek style. The referent of the pronoun αὐτῆς is Babylon. In formal parallel with the noun ἀγάλματα is χειροποίητα, things made by human hands. אֱלֹהֶיהָ “her gods” was read as ʾelileyha, which typically gets rendered as χειροποίητα. For the plural συνετρίβησαν (Q, S, A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has the singular συνετρίβη, which would be proper for neuter plural subjects.
Also in 14:12 we see the end of something being in the earth: “beneath you they will spread decay, and your covering will be a worm.” Revelation 14:8 and 18:2 link Isa 21:9 and Isa 51:17. Rev 14:8 has Ἔπεσεν, ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη, ἣ ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς πεπότικεν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. Rev 18:2 has καὶ ἔκραξεν ἐν ἰσχυρᾷ φωνῇ λέγων· Ἔπεσεν, ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη. Jerome quoted “Babylon is fallen, is fallen” in reference to the downfall of John of Constantinople (Letter 113.1).
Hear, remnant(21:10)
10 The (unexpected) plural ἡμῖν probably refers to Israel. The reasons for changes from the Hebrew are unclear. The imperative “Listen” was added, possibly because the Hebrew sentence was going on too long without a verb. The first person pronoun “My” was removed from “downtrodden” and “son.” Possibly the ד of מְדֻשָׁת was read as a ר and transposed with the ש, so that a form of שאר was read. “My son of threshing” was changed to “pained,” and the first person subject and second person object “I reported to you” was changed to the third person subject and first person object “he reported to us.” Eusebius said the “forsaken and tortured” for verse 10 were not “those of the circumcision” but rather “those of the time of the apostles who regretted and lamented the evil of humanity” (Dem. ev. 2.3).
The vision of Idoumaia(21:11-15)[[@Bible:Isa 21:11-12]]
11 The addressee of the voice is singular in Πρὸς ἐμέ. The subject of καλεῖ is not yet specified. The addressee indicated by φυλάσσετε is now plural. G read חילה for לילה, making it ἐπάλξεις, the plural of ἔπαλξις, a defensive fortification.
12 The verb φυλάσσω is present, either indicative or subjunctive. The first person is unexpected; the Hebrew is a participle, so perhaps φυλάσσων was intended. Instead of the present indicative or imperative οἴκει of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the imperfect indicative ᾤκει. Probably the imperative was intended, from the Hebrew (plural) שׁבו, since this clause makes little sense with an indicative.
[[@Bible:Isa 21:13-15]]
13 The time at which the sleep takes place is given in the genitive ἑσπέρας.
14 The water is for a meeting or encounter (συνάντησιν). The neuter ὕδωρ must be accusative, since the verb is second person plural. The plural οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες must be vocative, since the verbs are second person. The verb συναντᾶτε is cognate with the earlier noun συνάντησιν. This is the last finite verb in the paragraph; what follows is a string of phrases beginning with διὰ τό (providing the reason for fleeing), translating ומפני (describing that from which they are fleeing).
15 One of the things from which they flee are τοξευμάτων, arrows. These arrows are not “pulled” in the sense of a pulled tooth, which is removed, but in the sense of διατεταμένων of διατείνω, “extend,” which take place when a bow-string is pulled back.
Kedar will fail in a year(21:16-17)[[@Bible:Isa 21:16-22:1]]
16 The duration, a year, is specified as that of μισθωτοῦ, a hired worker.
17 The reappearance of τοξευμάτων recalls 21:15.
The word of the gully of Zion(22:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 22:1-7]]
1 G misread חזיון, “vision” as ציון, “Zion,” rendering it τῆς φάραγγος Σιών. Because Jerusalem is on a hill, it is surrounded by ravines.
2 Rahlfs divided the verses before μάταια; Swete and Ziegler after. The city in G is Zion; its people are creying out (βοώντων). The genitive μαχαίρας indicates the source or cause of the wounded. Basil Letter 44.2 and 46.1 quoted 22:2, weeping for souls.
3 As used also in 17:13 and 29:13, πόρρω is an adverb of relatively great distance.
A day of trouble, destruction, and trampling(20:4–14)
4 For the future κλαύσομαι the Hebrew has a prepositional phrase בבכי “in my weeping.” The verb κατισχύω normally involves being victorious by strength; the transitive use can mean “strengthen,” and this meaning is attested in the LXX (Deut 1:38). The infinitive παρακαλεῖν seems a bit out of place; it is unclear whether the με is the object of this infinitive, of κατισχύσητε, or both. Κατισχύσητε does not normally take an infinitive object, but neither is it usually transitive, for that matter. The noun σύντριμμα is cognate with the verb συντρίβω, which connotes breaking into pieces. Where Q reads λαοῦ, S, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read γένους. γένος normally means a genetically related person or group, in contrast to ἔθνος, which is more cultural. “Race” might be another adequate gloss. Matt 26:75 and Luke 22:62 share a phrase resembling πικρῶς κλαύσομαι. They both read καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἔξω ἔκλαυσεν πικρῶς. Chrysostom (Theod. laps. 1.3) quoted 22:4 as the words “of the prophet,” which he would use if someone tried to dissuade him from mourning. In Homily 16 on Romans 8:27 he attributed these words to Jeremiah, but to Isaiah in Homily 12 on Colossians 4:18 (that tears are blessed). Gregory of Nyssa (Funeral Oration on Meletius) quoted it when refusing to be consoled.
5 Τάραχος and ταραχῆς are synonyms.
6 A φαρέτρα holds arrows. Τhe nominative ἀναβάται ἄνθρωποι refers to the Elamites. In place of the accusative ἵππους (with S, B), A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has the dative ἵπποις. A παράταξις is a military formation of soldiers.
7 If the words ἔσονται αἱ ἐκλεκταὶ φάραγγές σου belong together, a nominative is missing; the meaning might be “Your select gullies will be,” or “Your gullies will be the elect,” or “The elect will be your gullies.” It might be possible to split this phrase in two, so that ἔσονται αἱ ἐκλεκταὶ is one sentence, and φάραγγές σου are the subject of the next sentence, despite the lack of article with φάραγγές σου. But in that case, the “elect” would be inexplicably feminine, whereas the Elamites are masculine. Silva simply ignored the ἔσονται. Ottley explained that the singular ἔσται would be expected as a translation of ויהן, but the plural was used because of the plural nominative immediately following.
In place of the future ἐμφράξουσι (spelled ἐμφράξουσιν in Q) found in Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the aorist subjunctive ἐμφράξωσι; ἐμφράσσω means to impair passage by filling the opening.
8 The horsemen not only will block up (ἐμφράξουσι) the gates, they will also ἀνακαλύψουσιν (future of ἀνακαλύπτω), uncover them. The reappearance of ἐκλεκτούς recalls 22:7.
9 ἄκρα normally means the peak or extreme point, but in a military contexts is used for a citadel at that high point of a town. The active indicative form εἴδοσαν is a mix of first and second aorist morphology for ὁράω / εἶδον. A κολυμβήθρα can refer to a reservoir or swimming pool.
10 That these Elamites tear down the houses is conveyed by the third person plural aorist of καθαιρέω. The result is indicated by the prepositional phrase εἰς ὀχύρωμα, which normally indicates a fortress. The beneficiary is indicated by the dative τῇ πόλει. The function of the genitive τοῦ τείχους is slightly harder to determine, but is probably the object that was turned into the fortress, as Silva translated, “to fortify the wall of the city.”
11 In verses 5-10, the verbs were all third person plural. In verse 11, the person changes to second person (still plural) ἐποιήσατε. Normally, ἀνὰ μέσον means “between” rather than “inside” or “within,” especially when used with δύο. The comparative form of the adverb ἔσω, ἐσώτερος can function as a preposition with the genitive, but “inside the old reservoir” would not make much sense. The feminine referent of αὐτήν most likely is the ancient reservoir.
12 κοπετόν implies mourning. The noun ξύρησις normally means shaving, a typical treatment of captives.
13 The pronoun αὐτοί agrees with the verbs’ reversion to third person plural again. Paul in 1 Cor 15:32 quoted 22:13 verbatim, as Φάγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν, αὔριον γὰρ ἀποθνῄσκομεν. Tertullian (8.17) asked the Psychics why they did not preach “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die,” since they are concerned mainly with food and drink. Cyprian (Test. 3.60) quoted the same passage to make his point that “too great lust of food is not to be desired.” The Apostolic Constitutions 3.1.7 quote this verse to condemn widows “who prefer eating and drinking before
all virtue.” Chrysostom (Homily 40) noted that 1 Cor 15:32 uses Isaiah 22:13-14, who when “discoursing of certain insensible and reprobate persons made use of these words.” He called them “certain foolish ones” in Homily 72.5 on John. Athanasius (Ep. fest. 2.7) quoted it support of his point, “those who are borne in the opposite direction have nothing better than to eat, and think their end is that they shall cease to be.” Those who love pleasures kill the soul with lusts (Ep. fest. 7.2).
14 The reappearance of uncovering (ἀνακεκαλυμμένα) recalls 22:8. The forgiveness is predicted (future of ἀφίημι) not to take place before death. Eusebius gave no indication that the forgiveness might take place thereafter. Clement of Alexandria (Paed. 2.1) condemned indulgent eating with the words, “For those that are absorbed in pots, and exquisitely prepared niceties of condiments, are they not plainly abject, earth-born, leading an ephemeral kind of life, as if they were not to live [hereafter]? Those the Holy Spirit, by Isaiah, denounces as wretched,” and quoted, “But they made mirth, killing calves, and sacrificing sheep, saying, Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” in condemning indulgent eating. He said, “your sin shall not be forgiven you till you die.” Jerome noted that God calls people to repentance, quoting 22:13-14 in Epist. 122.1 and 147.3. At the pronoun ὑμῖν and verb ἀποθάνητε, the grammatical person returns to second person.
Lord Sabaoth will depose Somnas(22:15-25)[[@Bible:Isa 22:15-16]]
15 The command to go is clearly addressed to the prophet, since it includes a command to go to the person for whom the prophecy is intended, so a past tense would be expected here. A παστοφόριον is the place for παστοφόροι, those who bring the παστός, which normally has something to do with brides, but sometimes powder; this place in the temple is mentioned by Josephus in J.W. 4.582 as τῶν παστοφορίων. It appears also in Esd A 9:1 and Jer 42:4. Eusebius provided the interpretations of “the Hebrew,” Symmachus, and Aquila (1.82). A ταμίας is a treasurer. The entry in BDAG discusses the accentuation of the imperative form εἰπόν; Ziegler has εἶπον.
16 The expression τί σοί appears to mean “what business do you have?” Somnas had apparently cut into stone (λατομέω) a tomb, μνημεῖον, which in older Greek could be anything by which something or someone is remembered; by the time of Christianity, it commonly referred to a tomb.
17 Three of the six instances of δή in G are together with Ἰδοὺ (3:1; 22:17; 33:7). The first-hands of both Q and S agree with B in reading the present tense ἐκβάλλει, but the future ἐκβαλεῖ of Q’s corrector, S corrector B, A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) fits better with the future of ἐκτρίβω (“rub out”). The man to which ἄνδρα refers is left implicit here, but the σου makes it clear that Somnas is intended. Swete and Ziegler divide the verse after καὶ τὸν στέφανόν σου τὸν ἔνδοξον; Rahlfs before. This phrase fits better with the preceding sentence, so I follow Swete and Ziegler. The crown held in high repute (ἔνδοξον) and robe are both objects of ἀφελεῖ.
18 The future verbs continue with ῥίπτω, “throw.” The country is described as ἀμέτρητον, beyond one’s ability to measure. The final fate of Somnas is given in the second person singular future (middle) of ἀποθνῄσκω. The combination of τίθημι with τινὰ εἴς τι is used to convey the transformation of one thing into another (BDAG s.v. τίθημι 5.a). The threats here are not necessarily chronological. Although one’s chariot (ἅρμα) and house might be ruined post-mortem, removal from one’s position can only happen during one’s lifetime. The phrase εἰς καταπάτημα recalls 5:5 (the vineyard); 7:23-25, and anticipates 28:18.
19 In the context of οἰκονομία, a managerial office, the meaning of στάσις is “position.” Luke 16:3 alludes to 22:19 with its οἰκονόμος who says to himself, τί ποιήσω, ὅτι ὁ κύριός μου ἀφαιρεῖται τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ; The second person singular future passive ἀφαιρεθήσῃ is also the reading of S correctors ca and cb3, Rahlfs and Ziegler; the original hand of S wrote ἀφρεθήσῃ; A and B have ἀφαιρεθήσει.
20 Swete spelled Ἐλιακίμ as Ἐλιακείμ. This Eliakim is mentioned in 36:3, 11, 22; 37:2, and also in 4 Kingdoms 18:18, 26, 37; 4 Kingdoms 19:2.
21 The recipient of the things taken in 22:17 and 19 is identified as Ἐλιακίμ.
22 The text of 22:22 is difficult.
Ottley noted, “Great varieties exist here, the question being one of clauses rather than words. Field and Ceriani are agreed in thinking that Q (with Γ 24 198 306 Syr.-hex.) preserves the true LXX. text, and that the fuller readings are Hexaplaric: B having admitted a portion of the intruding sentence, which duplicates the LXX. reading, a paraphrase. The original hand of א agrees with the Hebrew, that is, with the later Greek versions; and the correctors have been repeatedly at work” (1.31). Matt 16:19 quotes 22:22 as δώσω σοι τὰς κλεῖδας τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν δήσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν λύσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. The allusion substitutes the kingdom of heaven for the house of David, and the binding and loosing for the opening and closing. Rev 3:7 quotes 22:22 as: ὁ ἔχων τὴν κλεῖν Δαυείδ, ὁ ἀνοίγων καὶ οὐδεὶς κλείσει, καὶ κλείων καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀνοίξει. Origen’s Commentary on John 5.4 interprets Isaiah 22:22 in light of the parallel Revelation 3:7 as well as 5:1-5: no one should question the interpretation the Logos brings.
23 The place is secure in the sense that one can be confident of safety there. One can trust it. The father imagery continues from 22:21. The phrase ἔσται εἰς in G usually means “will become,” but it makes no sense for a leader to “become” a throne. Eusebius interpreted the story historically (1.82), but in a way that implicitly parallels Jesus with Eliakim on the basis of his gentleness. Eusebius said Eliakim would be trusted; people would be confident in him for their care (1.82). Eusebius claimed Eliakim symbolizes the Christian priesthood, replacing the Jewish, saying, τὸν δὲ Ἐλιακεὶμ θεοῦ ἀνάστασιν ἑρμηνευόμενον σύμβολον εἶναι τῆς νέας καὶ καινῆς ἱερωσύνης, ἣν ἡ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ἀνάστασις ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ καθ’ ὅλης τῆς οἰκουμένης συνεστήσατο. Cyril of Alexandria said “Eliakim” means “resurrection of God” (Comm. Isa. 22.10-14).
24 Evidently one Hebrew word gets a double translation here. The phrase καὶ ἔσται πεποιθώς appears to translate ותלו at the beginning of this verse, but the upcoming ἐπικρεμάμενοι (from ἐπικρεμαννύω) is a better match for the meaning of ותלו (“hang”).
The firmly established will be removed(22:25)
25 The verb στηρίζω, which typically means “strengthen” in the context of changing positions of authority, corresponds well to the English “establish.” Instead of τόπῳ (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has τῷ, matching 22:23.
The word of Tyre(23:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 23:1-3]]
1 The Oracle of Tyre (chapter 23) has been the subject of a mongraph-length study by Arie van der Kooij. Jesus in Matt 11:21 might expect this oracle to come to mind in his readers, when he says, οὐαί σοι, Χοραζίν, οὐαί σοι, Βηθσαϊδά· ὅτι εἰ ἐν Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἐγένοντο αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ γενόμεναι ἐν ὑμῖν, πάλαι ἂν ἐν σάκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ μετενόησαν. The present imperative Ὀλολύζετε recalls 14:31 and anticipates 23:14 precisely; the aorist is used at 10:10. The ships (πλοῖα) must be vocative in this case. first-hand of Sinaiticus()Q, , The subject of ἀπώλετο could be Tyre or Carthage; Carthage appears more likely because it the closer of the two, but Eusebius interpreted the destruction to refer only to Tyre. The subject of ἔρχονται is not specified, but would not be the ships of Carthage, since the form is not second but third person. The subject of the perfect passive singular ἦκται likely remains the same as that of ἀπώλετο, but could now be the land of the Kitienes. Despite what BDAG says, αἰχμάλωτος is an adjective with identical masculine and feminine
forms, modifying either Tyre or Carthage.
2 The nominative οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες is the subject of the perfect third person plural equative verb γεγόνασιν, and ὅμοιοι is the predicate nominative. The third nominative, μεταβόλοι, is in apposition to the inhabitants. The Hebrew is סחר. The genitive Φοινίκης most likely indicates the home of the traders, but (less probably) could indicate the place with which they trade. The Hebrew is צידון, Sidon. They are called διαπερῶντες, the participle of διαπεράω, which means move across. Athanasius (Ep. fest. 2.3) when admonishing his readers not to be like the evildoers who were careless and imitated the wicked, alluded to 23:2 as the prophet praying in the Spirit, “Ye are to me like merchant-men of Phoenicia,” as an example of the Word (the Son) trying to restrain his own people from such foolishness.
3 G translated ובמים רבים literally as ἐν ὕδατι πολλῷ, indicating that the sailors travel a great distance over the sea. Also in apposition to οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες is σπέρμα μεταβόλων. In Greek, they are traders from a family of traders, but in the MT, the word is שִׁחֹר; G confused sin and samek. The genitive absolute of ἄμητος, harvest, indicates either the time or the result, recalling 9:2, 17:5, 11; 18:4. This is the last occurrence of this word in G. The Hebrew behind μεταβόλοι is סחר again. The nominative has no verb here; the only finite verb in verses 2-3 is γεγόνασιν. Therefore a copular verb is supplied by translators. Ottley translated, “as when a harvest is gathered in, (are) the traffickers of the nations.” Silva translated, “The merchants of the nations are as when a harvest is being gathered in.” Van der Kooij translated, “As when the harvest is gathered in are the retailers of the nations.”
4 The vocative Σιδών is admonished with the aorist passive imperative of αἰσχύνω. The sea is an unexpected speaker here, but G is not creating the difficulty, only reproducing it, since εἶπεν ἡ θάλασσα is a literal translation of כי אמר ים, except that כי is ignored, and the article is added. In Hebrew, it is not the sea but the prophet who tells Sidon to be ashamed. The imperfect form of ὠδίνω (translating a qatal form, חלתי) could be first person singular or third person plural, but the parallel ἐθρεψα (aorist of τρέφω, “bring up”) establishes this as first person as well; Q’s margin’s and the other manuscripts (S, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the related ἐξέθρεψα (aorist of ἐκτρέφω, “bring up children”). The aorist form would be ὤδῑνα or ὠδίνησα (Ps 7:15). The aorist of τίκτω is in contrast to the preceding imperfect. The Greek ὑψόω is not normally used for raising children (fitting better with Q’s reading, ἐθρεψα); here it is a literal translation of רוממתי. Gregory Nazianzen (Oration 30.2), in discussing Wisdom personified in Proverbs 8:22, noted that the scripture often personifies lifeless objects, providing Isaiah 23:4 as an example. See also Gregory the Great, Pastor 3.28: “For Sidon is as it were brought to shame by the voice of the sea, when the life of him who is fortified, and as it were stedfast, is reproved by comparison with the life at those who are secular and fluctuating in this world.”
The esteemed of Tyre will be disregarded(23:5–8)[[@Bible:Isa 23:4-9]]
5 The neuter ἀκουστόν is nominative since the verb is γίνομαι; the neuter subject is impersonal. The subject of λήμψεται is ὀδύνη, a noun cognate with the verb ὤδινον in 23:4. The plural object αὐτούς is the Egyptians, despite the fact that Egypt was introduced as a singular noun. Hippolytus (Antichr. 52) quoted 23:4-5, saying these things shall be in the future and refer to the actions of the Antichrist, whose “first expedition will be against Tyre and Berytus, and the circumjacent territory. For by storming these cities first he will strike terror into the others.”
6 The addressees of ὀλολύξετε are the inhabitants; ἐνοικοῦντες is vocative. ὀλολύξετεAZieglerS and BhaveὀλολύζατεIn 20:6 the same expression ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ is used, to refer to an Egyptian island, translating האי הזה. Van der Kooij has argued that this demonstrative pronoun is very significant since it was added by G. He wrote, “It is to be noted that LXX offers a variation between vs 2 and vs 6: ἐν τῇ νήσῳ and ἐν τῇ νήσῳ ταύτῃ respectively; ΜΤ has in both verses the same reading (ישבי אי). It suggests that, unlike MT where both verses the same place is meant (Tyre; see chapter II), LXX vs 6 refers to a place different from the one envisaged in vs 2 which as we have seen is about the isle of the retailers of Phoenicia. The parallel wording of the text seems to point to Carthage: ‘Depart ye to Carthage, cry aloud, inhabitants of that isle.’” Van der Kooij changed the demonstrative from near (“this”) to far (“that”). I would argue that ταύτῃ is not an addition by G; it is rather a translation of the next Hebrew word, הזאת, which was doubly translated, once as ταύτῃ, and once as οὐχ αὕτη ἦν (οὐκ αὐτὴ ἦν in S). A similar double-translation appears in 21:6, where לך was understood both as an imperative and as a prepositional phrase; see the notes to 21:6. Therefore we do not have an intentional change of referent from Tyre to Carthage, nor did the early readers of the oracle of Tyre perceive a change of referent. Eusebius, Jerome, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, and Cyril of Alexandria did associate the prophecy in the first half of Isaiah 23 with a historical event in the past, but they held that it was Tyre, not Carthage, that was being led captive, and that this prophecy refers to the Babylonian capture of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar. If the translator
intended to convince his readers that the events prophesied had been fulfilled in his own day, he failed in his purpose.
7 The referent of οὐχ αὐτὴ is likely Carthage, but “this island” is also a grammatically possible referent. The addressees referred to by ὑμῶν are the inhabitants of “this” island.
Lord planned to disregard the esteemed(23:8-14)
8 The main topic is still Tyre rather than Carthage. The adjective ἥσσων, meaning “inferior,” translates the Hebrew המעטירה; G probably read the root as מעט, “be small.” The negator μή with indicative verbs indicates a question expecting a negative answer (Porter 1992, para. 18.2.1) Instead of the singular ἰσχύει of Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the plural ἰσχύουσιν. G translates ἔμποροι for סחר, which was earlier (23:2-3) translated by μεταβόλοι. Van der Kooij (1998a, 60) drew significance from this change, since ἔμποροι denotes wholesalers, whereas μεταβόλοι denotes retailers (see LSJ on μεταβολος). The evidence from Philo (Opif. 147), Josephus (Ant. 2.32; 20.34), and T. Zeb. (4:6) indicate that ἔμποροι are merchants who travel. The ἔνδοξοι have appeared in 5:14; and 10:33, and in the singular form in 12:4; 13:19; 22:18, 22:24. In 23:9 and 26:15 the connection with the earth will reoccur. The Hebrew here is נכבדי, like the second instance in 23:9. Rev 18:3 and 18:23 allude to 23:8, with their mention of οἱ ἔμποροι τῆς γῆς and οἱ ἔμποροί σου ἦσαν οἱ μεγιστᾶνες τῆς γῆς, respectively.
9 The question asked in 23:8 is answered here. Who planned this? Lord Sabaoth did. G has ἐνδόξων for the Hebrew צבי. Lord Sabaoth reverses the reputation of the esteemed (ἔνδοξον, translating נכבדי) with the aorist infinitive of ἀτιμάζω.
[[@Bible:Isa 23:10-12]]
10 The reason for working the land is that it is no longer possible to make a living by overseas trade with Carthage. The imperatives are now singular (ἐργάζου), in contrast to those in 23:6. The conjunction joining the two clauses is γάρ, so καί must be acting adverbially.
11 The reappearance of ἰσχύει recalls 23:8, as does ἰσχύν. The present tense indicates the decline of Tyre had already taken place. The Masoretic form is qatal,
but might have been read as a participle. The participle ἡ παροξύνουσα modifies the feminine χείρ. Lord Sabaoth’s command is given in the aorist tense (of ἐντέλλω), and ἀπολέσαι, the aorist infinitive of ἀπόλλυμι.
12 Although cognate to ὕβρις, which we have been translating as “pride,” the normal meaning of ὑβρίζω, “abuse,” fits this context well. The phrase θυγατέρα Σιών recalls chapters 3 and 4. Instead of Zion, B has Sidon, as θυγατέρα Σειδῶνος; Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it θυγατέρα Σιδῶνος.
13 The feminine pronoun αὕτη leaves γῆ implicit. No Hebrew word corresponds to ἠρήμωται, the perfect passive of ἐρημόω. The perfects continue with πέπτωκεν, the perfect of πίπτω.
14 The imperative ὀλολύζετε and ἀπώλετο recall 23:1, and ὀχύρωμα recalls 22:10, where the wall was being made into a fortress for the city of David. Whereas 23:1 did not specify who had perished, here the fortress is specified.
5
15 The accusative ἔτη ἑβδομήκοντα indicates duration (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.4). The meaning of ὡς χρόνος βασιλέως is obscure, but it represents well the underlying Hebrew כימי מלך, “days of a king.” The Greek ὡς χρόνος ἀνθρώπου represents the Hebrew אחד “one,” into which G imported his understanding of the preceding “like the time of a king.”
Tyre will be like a song of a prostitute(23:15-16)[[@Bible:Isa 23:14-16]]
15 It seems odd for a city to be compared to a song, but ἔσται Τύρος ὡς ᾆσμα πόρνης is G’s attempt to render יהיה לצר כשׁירת הזונה, read as יהיה צר כשׁירת זונה, without the preposition ל and article.
16 The city is being addressed by the imperative λαβέ. The aorist imperative of ῥεμβεύω is synonymous with ῥεμβω; both refer to moving aimlessly. The singular πόλις is vocative. The participle in πόρνη ἐπιλελησμένη is vocative, from ἐπιλανθάνομαι, “forget.” The imperative of κιθαρίζω
is cognate with κιθάραν from earlier in this verse. The imperative of ᾄδω is cognate with ᾆσμα from 23:15. The purpose of the song is that there might be (aorist subjunctive of γίνομαι) a μνεία, something by which to remember. Ziegler noticed the intertextual connection to Prov 7:12 ῥεμβεύω and ῥέμβομαι in connection with a harlot (see Cook 2010). Aphrahat interpreted this prophecy as fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar; Dem. 5.9 says he “was the overshadowing Cherub; who destroyed the Prince of Tyre.” Eusebius (1.83) agreed that Babylonians are those that fulfilled this prophecy, desolating Tyre for rising up against Israel, quoting Psalm 83:6-7. Jerome (Letter 130.9) used 23:16 to argue that even during penitence the harp is appropriate: “sin stricken as she is, even Tyre is bidden to take up her harp and to do penance.”
Tyre re-established, holy to the Lord(23:17-18)[[@Bible:Isa 23:17-18]]
17 Swete and Ziegler divide verses 16 and 17 after καὶ ἔσται μετὰ τὰ ἑβδομήκοντα ἔτη ἐπισκοπὴν ποιήσει ὁ θεὸς Τύρου, καὶ πάλιν ἀποκαταστήσεται εἰς τὸ ἀρχαῖον; Rahlfs divides them before. Q has a larger space prior to beginning these words than after, so my division agrees with Rahlfs. The ἐπισκοπή God makes is a visit in a supervisory role. The result is that it will be restored (from καθίστημι) to the way it was in ancient times, with the accusative τὸ ἀρχαῖον functioning adverbially. The ἐμπόριον refers to the place where merchants trade; there was such an “Exchange” in Athens. This noun recalls the ἔμποροι in 23:8, and indicates their restoration to even greater prosperity. Revelation 17:2 mentions βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς, which might allude to the phrase πάσαις βασιλείαις τῆς οἰκουμένης of Isa 23:17. The likelihood that this is the intention of the seer is confirmed by Rev 18:3, which has both βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς and οἱ ἔμποροι τῆς γῆς from 23:8. In its entirety it reads ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς πέπωκαν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς μετʼ αὐτῆς ἐπόρνευσαν καὶ οἱ ἔμποροι τῆς γῆς ἐκ τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ στρήνους αὐτῆς ἐπλούτησαν.
18 A third noun ἐμπορία is cognate with ἐμπόριον and ἔμποροι, referring to the activity in which merchants, ἔμποροι, engage. The noun μισθός normally applies to the wages of an individual, but can refer to recompense of any kind. Two nominative nouns are the subject of ἔσται, but they are differing genders. The predicate nominative is a neuter singular adjective ἅγιον. The phrase τῷ Κυρίῳ is one of the rare instances in which the article appears with Lord. Both οὐκ and ἀλλά are followed by the dative case, confirming they indicate a contrasting pair. The subject of συναχθήσεται is now πᾶσα ἡ ἐμπορία αὐτῆς. The purpose of the collected commerce is to fill (aorist passive infinitive of ἐμπίπλημι) the
inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that (εἰς indicating purpose or result) there will be a συμβολή, which normally expresses some kind of coming together. In the plural, it can specifically mean “contribution,” which fits this context, despite the singular form. There is a neuter noun μνημόσυνον, but μνημόσυνος is also an adjective, although the feminine form follows the first declension. Here we have the second declension, so μνημόσυνον cannot be modifying συμβολήν. Instead, two nouns are in apposition. In Dem. 21.6 Aphrahat wrote, “Now we see that Tyre was inhabited, and was opulent after she had wandered seventy years, and after she had received the reward of her harlotries and after she had committed fornication with all kingdoms. And she took the harp, and played it sweetly, and multiplied her music.”
Lord will desolate the world(24:1-5)[[@Bible:Isa 24:1-3]]
1 Cunha rejected the suggestion that another lexeme is used other than καταφθείρει (“ruins”) to translate the Hebrew participle בוקק (de Angelo Cunha 2014). It is translated with the present tense rather than the future καταφθερεῖ. The tenses then shift to the future ἐρημώσει, although the Hebrew is still a participle ובולקה. The verb ἀνακαλύψει recalls 20:4; 22:8-9, 14. The subject is still Lord. The referent of αὐτῆς is the inhabited world. The future tense continues with διασπερεῖ, from διασπείρω, “scatter.”
2 A series of contrasting pairs of categories of people are said to be the same (the lady, κυρία, like the θεράπαινα, female slave), indicating that the desolation will be indiscriminate. Gregory Nazianzen quoted 24:2 in Oration 2.82: “Nor indeed is there any distinction between the state of the people and that of the priesthood: but it seems to me to be a simple fulfilment of the ancient curse, ‘As with the people so with the priest.’” Jerome, Letter 128.4 quoted the same verse to make the point that priests should care for their flock.
3 Both words in the phrase φθορᾷ φθαρήσεται are cognate with καταφθείρει in 24:1. Two cognate datives occur in this verse: φθορᾷ and προνομῇ.
4 Both πενθέω and ὀλολύζω (24:11) are responses to sadness; the difference is that the intransitive use of πενθέω refers to one’s experience (grieving), and ὀλολύζω refers to a vocal expression (wailing). The expectation set up in 24:1 is fulfilled by ἐφθάρη. The condemnation (including that of 24:2) is against ὑψηλοί, those with high status. Cunha argued that the reason Greek text is shorter than the MT is not because of a shorter Vorlage but because G deliberately abbreviated his text (de Angelo Cunha 2014).
5 The subject of ἠνόμησεν (aorist of ἀνομέω) is not personal; it is the land. Instead of παρέβησαν, (from παραβαίνω, the more common word for transgressing the law), S and B have παρήλθοσαν, (from παρέρχομαι). In parallel with this transgression is the change (aorist of ἀλλάσσω) of the commandments.
Cheer has ceased(24:6-10)[[@Bible:Isa 24:1-3]]
6 Not the particle ἄρα, but the noun ἀρά “curse” translates
7 With πενθήσει the subjects again become impersonal: “wine,” and “vine.”
8 Cognate with the verb for cheering in the preceding verse is εὐφροσύνη. The egotism conveyed by αὐθάδεια includes arrogance and selfishness. Revelation 18:22 alludes to Isa 24:8 with its declaration of the end of musical delights: καὶ φωνὴ κιθαρῳδῶν καὶ μουσικῶν καὶ αὐλητῶν καὶ σαλπιστῶν οὐ μὴ ἀκουσθῇ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι
9 The reversal of fortunes results in their shame, expressed by the aorist passive of αἰσχύνω. G read בשיר as בשו, translating as ᾐσχύνθησαν. In this context, the form ἔπιον must be third person plural. Hebrew שכר is transliterated as σίκερα, an alcoholic drink other than wine. Because the word is transliterated rather than translated into Greek, it is appropriate to do the same in the English translation.
10 The expectation set up by 24:1’s ἐρημώσει αὐτήν is fulfilled in ἠρημώθη. The awkwardness of κλείσει οἰκίαν (οἰκίας in Q) in Greek comes from the Hebrew, which in the MT reads סגר כל בית “close every house.” In G, the “every” is moved to modify “city.” The purpose is expressed by τοῦ μὴ εἰσελθεῖν: so that the house cannot be entered.
Wail for the destruction and forsakenness(24:11-13)[[@Bible:Isa 24:11-15]]
11 The ubiquity of the desolation is expressed by the adverb πανταχῇ, “everywhere.” Some verbal repetition from 24:8 occurs in πέπαυται. The perfect tense reflects the Hebrew qatal form.
12 The reappearance of καταλειφθήσονται recalls 24:6. The future form, with καί indicates G read ונשׁאר, whereas the MT has only נשׁאר. Both καταλείπω and ἐγκαταλείπω appear together. Of the two, καταλείπω is the more common in G, appearing 45 times, in contrast to 17 times for ἐγκαταλείπω. In G’s usage, καταλείπω is used for the general sense of leaving, and is commonly used in the passive voice to refer to what is left behind, left over, or remaining. In contrast, G uses ἐγκαταλείπω for more intentional abandonment or forsaking, as in 1:4, 41:1, 17 (Isa 1:9 is the single exception). Although λείπω does not occur in G in uncompounded form, other compounds of λείπω include ἐκλείπω for discontinuation (ceasing or failing, e.g., 15:6, 19:5, 6, 13; 38:12, 14), διαλείπω for relenting (5:14), ἀπολείπω for abandoning (55:7), and ὑπολείπω for remaining (4:3).
13 The referent of ταῦτα πάντα is all the preceding future clauses.
Remnant cheered by Lord’s glory(24:13-15)[[@Bible:Isa 24:11-15]]
13 Instead of the future passive καλαμήσηται of Q, B, A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the present passive καλαμᾶται. The vocabulary recalls 3:12, where the addressees were “gleaned.” Swete accented τρύγητος as τρυγητός.
14 The meaning of φωνῇ βοήσονται, the reading of Q, S, A, Rahlfs, and Ziegler, is the same as the reading of B, which is βοῇ φωνήσουσιν. The recurring vocabulary καταλειφθέντες recalls the cities in 24:12. The cessation of cheer from 24:7-10 is reversed by εὐφρανθήσονται. The dative τῇ δόξῃ provides the reason for the cheer. Normally ταράσσω carries an undesriable connotation: that it is stirred up and confused, disturbed, agitated. Since in ταραχθήσεται τὸ ὕδωρ τῆς θαλάσσης the sea is experiencing the emotion opposite from the remnant, it seems that in this verse the sea is presented as the enemy of God’s people.
15 The logical connection created by διὰ τοῦτο makes little sense. Why should the troubling of the sea cause Lord’s glory to be in the sea’s islands? G misunderstood the imperative כבדו “glorify” as a noun “glory,” at least in the first clause of this verse. In the second clause, G has double-translated כבדו, this time with a meaning that better fits the preceding verse: ἔνδοξον ἔσται, “will be glorified.”
No escape for the lawless(24:16-20)[[@Bible:Isa 24:16-18]]
16 Rahlfs placed Κύριε ὁ θεὸς Ἰσραήλ in verse 15; Swete and Ziegler put them in verse 16. In Q there is a space before these words, agreeing with Swete and Ziegler. Wings (πτερύγων) appeared in 6:2. The Vulgate version of 24:16, “My secret is for Me and for Mine,” is quoted by Jerome in Epist. 48.13 and Theodoret, in Ecclesiastical History 1.3.
17 The παγίς coming upon those inhabiting the land is picked up by Luke 21:35: ὡς παγίς· ἐπεισελεύσεται γὰρ ἐπὶ πάντας τοὺς καθημένους ἐπὶ πρόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς. Rev 8:13 does the same, but its vocabulary for the storm is not παγίς: Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἤκουσα ἑνὸς ἀετοῦ πετομένου ἐν μεσουρανήματι λέγοντος φωνῇ μεγάλῃ· οὐαὶ οὐαὶ οὐαὶ τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν φωνῶν τῆς σάλπιγγος τῶν τριῶν ἀγγέλων τῶν μελλόντων σαλπίζειν.
19 The noun ἀπορίᾳ and its cognate verb convey being at a loss, experiencing puzzlement, and uncertainty. Brenton translated it as “perplex,” which I follow. Luke 21:25 alludes to the perplexity of Isa 24:19 in the face of natural calamities: Καὶ ἔσονται σημεῖα ἐν ἡλίῳ καὶ σελήνῃ καὶ ἄστροις, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς συνοχὴ ἐθνῶν ἐν ἀπορίᾳ ἤχους θαλάσσης καὶ σάλου. Chrysostom, Theod. laps. 1.12 paraphrased 24:19-22.20 The ὀπωροφυλάκιον recalls 1:8. The image of the ὀπωροφυλάκιον appears in Testament of Joseph 19.7 in the A text (19.12) (see also Isa 1:8) The καί between the participles ὁ μεθύων and κραιπαλῶν indicates that the simile has come to an end, and the verbs πεσεῖται and ἀναστῆναι have as their subject ἡ γῆ. The infinitive ἀναστῆναι in this context refers to the effort of the drunkard to rise after falling, hence the English “to get up.” Lord will reign in Jerusalem(24:21-23)[[@Bible:Isa 24:21-23]]
21 Cunha argued that G omitted the Hebrew והיה ביום ההוא deliberately (de Angelo Cunha 2014). The phrase τὸν κόσμον τοῦ οὐρανοῦ refers to not the “world” but the “order” of the sky. The “kings of the land” are alluded to in Rev 6:15 and Rev 17:18. Rev 6:15 has Καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς καὶ οἱ μεγιστᾶνες καὶ οἱ χιλίαρχοι καὶ οἱ πλούσιοι καὶ οἱ ἰσχυροὶ καὶ πᾶς δοῦλος καὶ ἐλεύθερος ἔκρυψαν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὰ σπήλαια καὶ εἰς τὰς πέτρας τῶν ὀρέων. Rev 17:18 has καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἣν εἶδες ἔστιν ἡ πόλις ἡ μεγάλη ἡ ἔχουσα βασιλείαν ἐπὶ τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς. Jerome referred to this verse in Pelag. 2.24.
22 The plural συνάξουσιν and ἀποκλείσουσιν have no explicit subject. The kings of the land from verse 21 could be the subject, or they could be the object. Eusebius ignored the plural endings of the verbs and said the hand of God is the one doing the gathering and imprisoning. The usual English glosses for the G’s ἐπισκοπή are misleading. It not carry the positive connotations of “visitation,” which in modern English is a friendly social activity, or “watching over” which is a benevolent protective activity. Instead, “examination” or “inspection” convey the meaning of the Greek better. In G’s usage, ἐπισκοπή is a thing to be dreaded. In 10:3 it describes the day of affliction; in 23:16 Tyre is examined; in 29:6, the visitation comes with thunder and quaking.
23 Rev 4:4 alludes to the elders of Isa 24:23 as follows: Καὶ κυκλόθεν τοῦ θρόνου θρόνους εἴκοσι τέσσαρες, καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς θρόνους εἴκοσι τέσσαρας πρεσβυτέρους καθημένους περιβεβλημένους ἐν ἱματίοις λευκοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν στεφάνους χρυσοῦς. Rev 21:23 alludes to the glorification of Lord without the moon and sun: καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ λύχνος αὐτῆς τὸ ἀρνίον.
A song glorifying Lord(25:1-5)[[@Bible:Isa 25:1-2]]
1 The usual translation of אמן, “amen” in the LXX is γένοιτο (especially in Deut 27 and the Psalms) which is what we find here. However, the masoretes pointed this noun not as “amen” but as אֹמֶן. The other instance of אמן in Isaiah is in 65:16, where it is rendered ἀληθινόν. The address to God does not end here, since the second person verbs continue. Methodius (Oration Concerning Simeon and Anna 6) prayed “O Lord my God, I will glorify Thee, I will praise Thy name; for Thou hast done wonderful things; Thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth” from 25:1.
2 The transformation of one thing into another is expressed by τίθηναι τι εἰς τι in the phrase ἔθηκας πόλις εἰς χῶμα. The city is transformed into χῶμα, which normally refers to earthworks; it becomes a pile of soil. The adjective ὀχυρός “strong” is often used as a military term; in this context it means “secure.” The infinitive τοῦ πεσεῖν in this case conveys the result rather than (as is usual) purpose. The construction τὸν αἰῶνα is comprehensible as an adverbial accusative: “forever.”
3 The Hebrew על כן receives its typical treatment, as διὰ τοῦτο.4 The second person singular aorist middle indicative of γίνομαι indicates what Lord has become. The second predicate nominative σκέπη “shelter” is parallel to βοηθός; it too has ἐγένου as its verb. Those for whom Lord is a shelter are those ἀθυμήσασιν, i.e., those lacking θυμός, passion. Their lack of passion is attributable to ἔνδεια, which signifies deficiency. 2 Thess 3:2 has a verbal allusion to Isa 25:4’s rescuing from evil people: καὶ ἵνα ῥυσθῶμεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων· οὐ γὰρ πάντων ἡ πίστις.5 The Hebrew ציון means “parched land,” but G understandably took it as the place name Σιών. Ambrose Fid. 3.5.40 and John Cassian Collat. 2.13.12 both quote from this paragraph. Lord will act on this mountain toward all nations(25:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 25:5-7]]
6 The dative πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν could express benefit “for” or detriment “against.” The mountain referenced by ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τοῦτο is presumably Zion, with the implication that the oracle was delivered at Jerusalem. The prepositional phrase without a preceding article indicates where the action will take place, not where the nations are located. Cyril of Jerusalem (Lecture 21.7) interpreted the “mountain” as the Church, and the ointment is mystically the Unction (anointing on the forehead). 1 Enoch 10:18-19 alludes to the abundance of wine after the day of judgement.
7 Although Rahlfs places χρίσονται μύρον at the end of verse 6, Swete and Ziegler have in verse 7. The middle of χρίω here implies self-anointing. The addressee of the imperative παράδος is not obvious, but presumably is the prophet. Although in G, the preposition ἐπί (when it is not locative) tends to indicate opposition rather than benefit (1:25; 2:4, 12-16; 5:25; 7:1, 17; 8:7, 21; 9:4, 8, 11-12, 17. 21; 10:4, 12, 24-26; 11:14-15; 14:4, 8, 16, 26), the favourable meaning is also attested (8:14, 17; 9:6-7; 10:21; 11:2, 10; 12:2; 14:30; 15:2); the English “toward” was chosen in order to not import a positive or negative attitude, since in this context (see verse 6) the nations are happy at Lord’s treatment. Rufinus wrote, “First, therefore, hear how this very thing is prophetically declared by Isaiah, that the Jews, to whom the Prophets had foretold these things, would not believe, but that they who had never heard them from the Prophets, would believe them.… Moreover, this same Isaiah foretells that, while those who were engaged in the study of the Law from childhood to old age believed not, to the Gentiles every mystery should be transferred,” and quoted 25:6-7 in support, with its “deliver all these things to the nations” (παράδος πάντα ταῦτα τοῖς ἔθνεσιν) (Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed 19).
Lord took away every tear(25:8)[[@Bible:Isa 25:8]]
8 Although G understood המות, death, to be the subject of the verb rather than the object (Κατέπιεν ὁ θάνατος ἰσχύσας), Paul in 1 Cor 15:54 understood death to be the object, which matches the Hebrew. The aorist participle indicates that since death had become strong, it was able to swallow. Most early
interpreters of G took this verse to refer to death’s struggle to become victorious. In this context, death fails, since tears, the sign of mourning, will be no more. The verb ἀφεῖλεν is used for the removal of both the tears and the reproach of the people. Because 25:8 is quoted in the New Testament, it gets relatively more attention than the rest of this chapter. 1 Cor 15:54 has Κατεπόθη ὁ θάνατος εἰς νῖκος. Revelation 20:14 also personifies death, but that is the extent of the allusion. The sentiment there, that death is itself consumed, is a closer match to 1 Cor 15:54. Revelation 7:17 has καὶ ἐξαλείψει ὁ θεὸς πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν; Rev 21:4 has the same, but without ὁ θεός. Irenaeus (Haer. 5.12.1) quoted 25:8 in support of his claim that the flesh is capable of incorruption, when life drives out death. Tertullian, Marc. 5.10 wrote of death’s “struggle,” alluding to the ἰσχύσας of 25:8. Origen (Princ. 2.3.2) likewise connected 25:8 with 1 Cor 15:53-56, speaking of the “strength” of sin, which is the law. In Comm. Matt. 12.35, Origen collected scriptural references to death, and wrote: “Now in these passages it appears to me that it is one thing to taste of death, but another thing to see death, and another thing for it to come upon some, and that a fourth thing, different from the aforesaid, is signified by the words, ‘Death becoming mighty has swallowed them up,’ and a fifth thing, different from these, by the words, Death and Hades follow them.” Theodoret of Cyrrhus (Counter-statement Against 10) quoted 25:8 in reference to Jesus’ tears, showing that Jesus could suffer. Athanasius (C. Ar. 2 15.16) connected the raising of the ancient dead at Jesus’ death with 25:8. Gregory of Nyssa said childbirth no longer carries sorrow, quoting 25:8.
God will provide rest on this mountain(25:9-12)[[@Bible:Isa 25:9-10]]
9 Irenaeus (Haer. 4.9.2) interpreted 25:9 in reference to Christ, in whom trust was placed.
10 The expression ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος τοῦτο recalls 25:6. Becking identified a similar proverb in the Mari letters (18th C BCE), “beneath straw water runs,” and argued that each of the two sayings (Akkadian and Hebrew) can shed light on the other (Becking 2010).
The sudden introduction of a specific nation Μωαβῖτις comes with no warning or foreshadowing. Moab is to be trampled like ἅλων (which can refer to a threshing floor or to the grain on such a floor) by means of (dative) ἁμάξαις, wagons.
11 The future is used of ἀνίημι, which usually means releasing restrictions, letting go. Here it translates פָּרַשׂ, “spread.” The image of stretching out one’s hands recurs in 65:2. The subject cannot be the feminine Moab because αὐτοῦ indicates that the owner of the hands is masculine. Rather, the subject is unspecified. Likewise the object of ἐταπείνωσεν is not given, and must be inferred from the upcoming ταπεινώσει, which has as object τὴν ὕβριν αὐτοῦ. The reading of Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), ἃ, refers to things as yet unspecified; S has ᾗ, referring to the insolence.
12 The καταφύγη, a place of refuge, is brought down to the ἔδαφος, which refers to a bottom surface, i.e., “floor,” or “ground.”
Song over the land of Judah(26:1)[[@Bible:Isa 26:1-6]]
1 See BDAG s.v. τίθημι ⑤ⓐβ regarding θήσει with double accusatives used for making something into something. Instead of the genitive ἡμῶν (Q, followed by Rahlfs), S and A have the dative ἡμῖν; B (followed by Ziegler) lacks this pronoun. According to Q’s reading, he makes the wall “our” deliverance; in S, the deliverance is for our benefit.
We hoped on Lord(26:2-10)[[@Bible:Isa 26:1-6]]
3 Justin Martyr (Dial. 24) referred to “λαὸς φυλάσσων πίστιν, ἀντιλαμβανόμενος ἀληθείας, καὶ φυλάσσων εἰρήνην,” using the language of 26:2-3.
4 Third Enoch 42.5 refers to the Lord as “the everlasting Rock,” following the Hebrew צור rather than the Greek ὁ μέγας.
6 In G, the root πατέω appears most frequently in chapters 25 and 26. It translates the roots רמס (5 times), הלך, דרך, בוס (3 times each), דושׁ (twice), and six other roots. With the exception of בוס , which is never translated as simple πατέω, there is no difference between the πατέω and καταπατέω in Isaiah. Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. Bas. 42.8) associated the “meek” of 26:6 with those who acknowledge the Trinity, in contrast to the Arians.
7 Raurell noted that G shifts the credit for the way of the righteous from God over to the pious themselves. He pointed out that παρασκευάζειν is rarely used in the other books of the LXX. In Jeremiah, it means preparation for war (1982, 70).
8 As Raurell noted, this judgement as a positive thing that the righteous need not fear, linking the sentiment to 28:17, 21 (1982, 71).
9 Wido van Peursen noted that although Isa 26:9-19 was included in the Syriac Odes because of the Greek tradition, the text itself is from the Peshitta. Peursen identified three rescensions made since this Ode was originally taken from the Peshitta: one early and one late West Syriac rescension and a Melkite recension. These were influenced by the Greek text (van Peursen 2010).
10 Origen (Comm. Jo. 2.20) quoted 26:9 in an explanation of what “the light of men” might be. Athanasius quoted the same verse to support his point that people should never leave off seeking God.
Lord, your arm is high(26:11)[[@Bible:Isa 26:11]]
11 Heb 10:27 alludes to Isa 26:11 in the words, φοβερὰ δέ τις ἐκδοχὴ κρίσεως καὶ πυρὸς ζῆλος ἐσθίειν μέλλοντος τοὺς ὑπεναντίους. Cyprian (Test. 2.4) referred to this verse in his argument that Christ is the hand and arm of God.
Lord, give us peace(26:12-15)[[@Bible:Isa 26:12-18]]
13 2 Timothy 2:19 alludes to Isa 26:13, with the words, ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν, ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην· ἔγνω κύριος τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ, καί· ἀποστήτω ἀπὸ ἀδικίας πᾶς ὁ ὀνομάζων τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου.
14 In the absence of an appropriate accusative object, ἀναστήσωσιν would normally be understood as intransitive “rise.” But probably because of the context of healers and death, Eusebius took the healers to be restoring (raising) to life (1.87).
15 The direct address to Lord twice uses an imperative πρόσθες. Eusebius objected to the “evils” that God is supposed to increase according to the Old Greek, and preferred the rendering of all the other versions and “the Hebrew.”
I remembered Lord in distress(26:16-18)[[@Bible:Isa 26:1-6]]
17 John and Revelation share some childbirth vocabulary with 26:17. John 16:21 reads, ἡ γυνὴ ὅταν τίκτῃ λύπην ἔχει, ὅτι ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα αὐτῆς· ὅταν δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παιδίον, οὐκέτι μνημονεύει τῆς θλίψεως διὰ τὴν χαρὰν ὅτι ἐγεννήθη ἄνθρωπος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. Revelation 12:2 reads, καὶ ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα, καὶ κράζει ὠδίνουσα καὶ βασανιζομένη τεκεῖν.
18 Rahlfs put διὰ τὸν φόβον σου, κύριε in verse 17; Swete and Ziegler have them in verse 18. The previous line in Q extends farther than typical before breaking (the -ου in σου would normally be on the next line); for this reason, my versification here agrees with Swete and Ziegler. Archelaus (The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes) may allude to 26:18.
The dead will rise(26:19-20)[[@Bible:Isa 26:19]]
19 Two synonymous verbs are used for the resurrection: ἀναστήσονται and ἐγερθήσονται, one active (intransitive), and the other passive. G regularly renders קום with ἀνίστημι; ἐγείρω is much less common, used once each for four different Hebrew roots. Here the root is קיץ, which also appears in 29:8 for resurrection (G uses ἐξανίστημι), and in the rest of the Greek scriptures is typically translated as ἐξεγείρω. Matthew 11:5 and Luke 7:22 allude to 26:19; they use it as one of the identifying signs of the one who was to come. Matthew’s version has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke differs only in the omission of several instances of καί. Matthew later alluded to the same prophecy in Matt 27:52, καὶ τὰ μνημεῖα ἀνεῴχθησαν καὶ πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθησαν. Luke 7:22 has πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάννῃ ἃ εἴδετε καὶ ἠκούσατε· τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. John 5:28 alludes to a phrase verbatim: ἔρχεται ὥρα ἐν ᾗ πάντες οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις ἀκούσουσιν τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ. The verse is hugely popular among the church fathers.
20 The rarer βαδίζω is used for הלך rather than the usual πορεύομαι. The four times βαδίζω does appear in G, they all translate הלך. Although the imperative ἀποκρύβηθι is morphologically passive, rendering it in English as “be hidden” overtranslates the passive sense. The expression ὅσον ὅσον is given by LEH as “in a very little while.” Ottley explained, “the expression ὅσον ὅσον is rare: it occurs in Heb 10:37, possibly a reference to this passage: see Bp Westcott’s note in his Comm. on the Epistle. It is also found, Aristophanes Vespae 213, ὅσον ὅσον στίλην, and in the Anthology (οὐδʼ ὅσον ὅσσον, Philet. ap. Stobaeus, I. 104, 12).” Isa 26:20 is alluded to in Matt 6:6 and Heb 10:37. Matthew has very similar wording and inflection, but describes a different situation: σὺ δὲ ὅταν προσεύχῃ, εἴσελθε εἰς τὸ ταμεῖόν σου καὶ κλείσας τὴν θύραν σου πρόσευξαι τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ· καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι. As Westcott noted, Heb 10:37 uses the rare expression from Isa 26:29 in the context of Christ’s return: ἔτι γὰρ μικρὸν ὅσον ὅσον, ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἥξει καὶ οὐ χρονίσει. Isaiah 26:20 is very popular among the church fathers. Athanasius (Apol. Const. 34) defended his silence with the words from 26:20, “Hide thyself for a little moment, until the wrath of the Lord be overpast.”
Lord brings wrath(26:21)[[@Bible:Isa 26:20-21]]
21 Revelation 8:13 has a verbal allusion: Καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἤκουσα ἑνὸς ἀετοῦ πετομένου ἐν μεσουρανήματι λέγοντος φωνῇ μεγάλῃ· οὐαὶ οὐαὶ οὐαὶ τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἐκ τῶν λοιπῶν φωνῶν τῆς σάλπιγγος τῶν τριῶν ἀγγέλων τῶν μελλόντων σαλπίζειν.
Lord will slay the dragon(27:1)[[@Bible:Isa 27:1]]
1 Revelation twice uses imagery from Isa 27:1. Rev 12:3 mentions the dragon (καὶ ὤφθη ἄλλο σημεῖον ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, καὶ ἰδοὺ δράκων μέγας πυρρὸς ἔχων κεφαλὰς ἑπτὰ καὶ κέρατα δέκα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτοῦ ἑπτὰ διαδήματα), and in Rev 13:1, he comes from the sea (Καὶ εἶδον ἐκ τῆς θαλάσσης θηρίον ἀναβαῖνον, ἔχον κέρατα δέκα καὶ κεφαλὰς ἑπτὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν κεράτων αὐτοῦ δέκα διαδήματα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτοῦ ὀνόμα[τα] βλασφημίας).
2 Eusebius identified the vineyard with that of chapter 5, and said it was beautiful and it was a desire (ἦν οὖν ποτε καλὸς οὗτος καὶ ἐπιθύμημα ἦν, 1.90). He made no comment on the puzzling infinitive ἐξάρχειν κατʼ αὐτῆς (Q reads αὐτοῦ), which has to do with leading, typically in the context of singing, (1 Kingdoms 18:7; 21:12; Exod 15:21), which does not make much sense in this context. Muraoka (GELS) indicated that here the phrase means “to act as a leader concerning
(or against) it.” Ottley supplied much in order to make a sensible translation, “In that day (shall there be) a fair vineyard; (there is) a desire to begin (a song) upon her.”
Israel the beautiful vineyard(27:2-6)[[@Bible:Isa 27:2-6]]
4 The letter η makes the most sense if taken as a relative pronoun. οὐκ ἔστιν ἣ οὐκ ἐπελάβετο αὐτῆς would mean there is none which (feminine nominative) did not seize it (feminine genitive). Both feminine pronouns would most reasonably refer to cities. Although the grammatical person is first person in both the question and the clause that follows, because the same verb τίθημι is used with the first person first as object then as subject, apparently a dialogue is taking place, with the prophet asking the question, and Lord answering, then the prophet speaking again about Lord. The object of ἠθέτηκα αὐτήν, the feminine singular object that is set could be a city, but the closer feminine singular is the stalk, especially since it too is an object of τίθημι. Because πολεμίαν is not a noun but a feminine adjective, and the noun it modifies is not explicit, it must describe something feminine implicitly as enemy. Perhaps “land” is implied, but also πόλις would be an appropriate closest match. An alternate translation could be, “I set it up of account of this hostile [land].”
6 The οἰκουμένη appears in G in two clusters: chapters 10-14 and 23-27.
The slayer will be slain(27:7-9)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
7 The rhetorical question Μὴ ὡς αὐτὸς ἐπάταξεν, καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως πληγήσεται expects a negative answer (Porter 1992, sec. 18.2.1). The preceding αὐτός is emphatic, so the question asks if the beater himself will be beaten (πληγήσεται is the passive where ἐπάταξεν is active).
8 Although in the other instances in Isaiah μελετάω tends to be something audible, that meaning is not as clear here. Eusebius took it to be something obsessive, which would make sense if it is like chanting a mantra. See the commentary on 38:14. Although πνεῦμα could be translated as “wind,” I translate “spirit” because Eusebius spoke of this πνεῦμα inside the unfaithful Gentiles (1.90).
9 Romans 11:27 quotes καὶ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρʼ ἐμοῦ διαθήκη, ὅταν ἀφέλωμαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν, pluralizing G. There is semantic overlap between βωμός and θυσιαστήριον. They appear in parallel in Hosea 10:8; Sirach 50:11, 14, and after destroying the βωμούς in 2 Macc 10:2, they built ἕτερον θυσιαστήριον. The children of Jacob who are traversing the world are, according to Eusebius, the apostles, who brought the possibility of removal of sin. Eusebius located the time of the altar-breaking after this blessing (εὐλογία), when idolatry was replaced with God-fearing throughout the empire. The blessing is indicated by two clauses introduced by ὅταν. The two subsequent clauses introduced by καί express further attendant circumstances.
The flock will be neglected(27:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
10 Because ποίμνιον normally refers to a group of sheep, it is surprising to read that a ποίμνιον might be inhabited, as τὸ κατοικούμενον ποίμνιον states. Brenton translated, “the flock that dwelt there,” and Ottley wrote, “the fold that is inhabited.” But Plato, Leges 683a (ὀρθῶς ἔφατε κατοικεῖσθαι καὶ Κρήτην ὡς ἀδελφοῖς νόμοις) indicates that the passive of κατοικέω is to refer to the administration or governance of a state.
The creator will not show mercy(27:11)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
11 The words קצירה תשׁברנה have no equivalent in G.
Gather the sons of Israel(27:12)[[@Bible:Isa 27:7-11]]
12 G rendered the imperfect תלקטו with the imperative συναγάγετε.
Those destroyed in Assyria and Egypt will return(27:13)[[@Bible:Isa 27:11-13]]
13 Matthew 24:31 alludes to the gathering at the trumpet blast from Isa 27:13, καὶ ἀποστελεῖ τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ μετὰ σάλπιγγος μεγάλης, καὶ ἐπισυνάξουσιν τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων ἀνέμων ἀπʼ ἄκρων οὐρανῶν ἕως [τῶν] ἄκρων αὐτῶν.
Woe to the crown of pride(28:1-6)[[@Bible:Isa 28:1-3]]
1 Willem Beuken identified verbal and ideological connections between the Isaianic Apocalypse and the chapters that follow. He pointed to certain phrases that are shared between the two sections, and noted that in Isaiah 28-31 Jerusalem experiences the specific judgement described in Isaiah 24-27 (Beuken 2010). The adjective παχύς can be used for fat (Hippocrates, Aph. 3.25), and when describing land, its fertility can be meant (Xenophon, Oec. 17.8). But more prototypically it expresses thickness and substance (Aristophanes, Lys. 25-27).
3 Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. 42.11) mentioned the hirelings of Ephraim and crown of insolence on the occasion of his resignation as bishop.
4 καταπίνω can be used of both liquids and solids. This verb is used in 1 Peter 5:8 for the lion who seeks whom he may devour.
5 The eschatological crown of the righteous (also in 62:3 and Ezek 28:12) is developed in 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Tim 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pet 5:4; Rev 2:10; 3:11. It is picked up in 1QS 4:7; 1QHa, 2 Bar 15:8, and Gk. Apoc. Ezra 6.17.
6 Because the infinitive ἀνελεῖν is the complement of κωλύων, my translation uses the noun “destruction.”
Priest and prophet misled by drink(28:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 28:7-8]]
7 The accusative article on σίκερα (rather than genitive) indicates that the drink is not the means but the cause or reason for the wandering. The Epistle of Pope Anterus quoted 28:7 “They have erred through wine; they have not known the seer; they have been ignorant of judgment” in reference to those who think bishops may change cities to suit themselves.
8 The adverb ἕνεκεν functions as a preposition with the genitive to indicate that the reason for the curse is πλεονεξία. Mishnah Avot 3.5 quotes 28:8: “For all tables are full of vomit, filthiness without God.”
Our report(28:9-12)[[@Bible:Isa 28:9-12]]
9 Third Enoch 48C.12 quotes 28:9, “The virtuous man escapes misfortune, the wicked man incurs it instead,” in support of the claim that if a man repents, God’s punishment is transferred to another wicked man.
10 The Hebrew קו לקו seems to be behind Irenaeus’ statement (Haer. 1.24.5) that some “affirm that the barbarous name in which the Saviour ascended and descended, is Caulacau.” This name is also mentioned in Hippolytus Refutation of All Heresies 5.10.
11 Paul alluded to Isa 28:11-12 in 1 Cor 14:21: ἐν τῷ νόμῳ γέγραπται ὅτι Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ, καὶ οὐδʼ οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου, λέγει κύριος. The introductory formula might imply Paul intended to quote verbatim, but what he wrote is a paraphrase adapted to his context. The subject changes from first person singular (Lord) in Isaiah, to third person plural. The other languages spoken are mentioned by Apostolic Constitutions 8.1.
12 Because ἀνάπαυμα is in parallel with another location (σύντριμμα), my translation has “resting-place” rather than “rest.” Isa 28:12 may be what Jesus had in mind in Matt 11:29, ἄρατε τὸν ζυγόν μου ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς καὶ μάθετε ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ, ὅτι πραΰς εἰμι καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, καὶ εὑρήσετε ἀνάπαυσιν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑμῶν.
Lord God’s oracle will be oppression(28:13)[[@Bible:Isa 28:13]]
13 Both Brenton and Ottley also left ἔτι μικρὸν ἔτι μικρόν as the literal “yet a little, yet a little,” rather than paraphrasing to its evident meaning, “in a little while.” Although εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω often corresponds to “behind” in English, the expression “fall behind” carries connotations in the sense of not keeping up with the rest of the pack, connotations that the Greek does not. Therefore “fall backward” is the preferable translation here.
Covenant with death(28:14-15)[[@Bible:Isa 28:14-15]]
15 The plural of συνθήκη is typically used for a treaty (between individuals or states) because of the plural articles of agreement. That meaning of διαθήκη is also attested in the Greco-Roman world (and is firmly at home in the biblical literature), but more commonly διαθήκη has to do with the disposition of property.
Zion’s cornerstone(28:16-19)[[@Bible:Isa 28:16-20]]
16 LEH suggests the phrase λίθον ἀκρογωνιαῖον means “cornerstone,” and that together ἀκρογωνιαῖον πολυτελῆ occurs several times in the OG (Ziegler 1934, 67; Seeligmann 1948, 36). The adjectives πολυτελῆ ἐκλεκτὸν ἔντιμον are all masculine singular, matching λίθον. Isaiah 28:16 is cited by Rom 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet 2:4, 6, and alluded to in Matt 21:42; Luke 20:17; Rom 11:11; Eph 2:20; 2 Tim 2:19. The allusion is not verbal in Matt 21:42 and Luke 20:17, which share only one
word in common with Isa 28:16. Matthew introduces the quotation with Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς; Luke uses Τί οὖν ἐστιν τὸ γεγραμμένον τοῦτο, then followed by Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας. Matthew then adds, παρὰ κυρίου ἐγένετο αὕτη, καὶ ἔστιν θαυμαστὴ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν; Rom 9:33 quotes more directly: καθὼς γέγραπται· Ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν λίθον προσκόμματος καὶ πέτραν σκανδάλου, καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ οὐ καταισχυνθήσεται. Ephesians 2:20 alludes to the foundation’s cornerstone with ἐποικοδομηθέντες ἐπὶ τῷ θεμελίῳ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ προφητῶν, ὄντος ἀκρογωνιαίου αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. Second Timothy 2:19, mentions the foundation in ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν. First Peter 2:4 alludes to the select honourable stone with the distinctive vocabulary Πρὸς ὃν προσερχόμενοι, λίθον ζῶντα, ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπων μὲν ἀποδεδοκιμασμένον παρὰ δὲ θεῷ ἐκλεκτὸν ἔντιμον, then follows up in 1 Pet 2:6 with the quotation: διότι περιέχει ἐν γραφῇ· Ἰδοὺ τίθημι ἐν Σιὼν λίθον ἀκρογωνιαῖον ἐκλεκτὸν ἔντιμον, καὶ ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ οὐ μὴ καταισχυνθῇ.
17 The ὅτι could be causal, and therefore parenthetical, or it could introduce the content of the lie, but this latter option requires that παρέλθῃ be synonymous with ἐπέλθῃ, which, as Ottley noted, carries problems of its own.
18 Although the verb in ἔσεσθε αὐτῇ εἰς καταπάτημα is one of being, not of trampling, because the English “you will become a trampling-ground for it” is rather awkward, the (admitttedly slightly less figurative) meaning is “you will be trampled by it.” The parenthetical note begun by ὅτι in verse 17 begins with the storm as its subject. By the time the second-person subject resumes, the main line of discourse has resumed, but it is not clear where it has done so, i.e., whether the clause with hope as its subject is also parenthetical.
19 Although πρωῒ πρωΐ may be a semiticism meaning “every morning” (LEH, s.v.), it likely would not have been recognized as such to a native Greek reader. Eusebius needed to explain that this phrase means it will not delay (τοῦτο δὲ ὑμῖν οὐκ εἰς μακρὸν ἔσται, ἀλλὰ πρωῒ πρωΐ, τοῦτ’ ἔστι διὰ τάχους ἥξειν ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς).
Lord’s deeds of anger(28:19–29)[[@Bible:Isa 28:21-22]]
21 The analogy Ὥσπερ ὄρος ἀσεβῶν ἀναστήσεται is odd. Ottley added “at,” for “As (at) the mount….” Q’s margins allow for the addition of Κύριος ΠΙΠΙ; S and B have Κύριος, and ΠΙΠΙ is Q’s transliteration of the tetragrammaton. Eusebius said not Lord but the wrath of God would hang over them like a mountain.
22 The verb συντέμνω has to do with cutting something short (such as a speech or a trip), or curtailing something (such as time or expenses). Eusebius interpreted these συντετμημένα deeds as deeds that had been adjudicated, ordained, and settled (κεκριμένα καὶ ὡρισμένα καὶ συντεταγμένα πράγματα, 1.93). Isa 28:22 is alluded to in Rom 9:28, with shared lexical items in modified forms: λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶ συντέμνων ποιήσει κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς.
25 Although the Greek order is μελάνθιον καὶ κύμινον, with black cumin first, and cumin second, to translate that order in English would result in ambiguity. Ottley avoids the problem by translating the former as “fennel,” but neither this or “anise” or “dill” is the correct plant Nigella sativa.
29 The wonders “came forth” (ἐξῆλθεν) from (παρά with the genitive) Lord. Eusebius rephrased this as, ἀπόφασις γὰρ ἀπὸ κυρίου σαβαὼθ ἐξενήνεκται.
Woe to Ariel(28:29-29:4)[[@Bible:Isa 29:1-4]]
Codex Vaticanus (B) seems to differ from Q, S, and A more significantly in the first half of chapter 29 than in previous chapters.
1 Ariel is another name for Jerusalem, as noted also by Eusebius (1.95), who also pointed out that the word refers to the altar (Ezekiel 43:13-16) and means “lion of God.”
2 Although this oracle is against Jerusalem, the name Ariel appears in association with Moab also in 2 Sam 23:20, and Eusebius (1.95) considered it a city of Moab in Isa 15:19 (καὶ ἀρῶ τὸ σπέρμα Μωὰβ καὶ Ἀριήλ).
3 A word cognate to χάρακα is used by Hermas in Similitude 5.2 (χαρακεῖν). Luke 19:43 alludes to Isa 29:3 with ὅτι ἥξουσιν ἡμέραι ἐπὶ σὲ καὶ παρεμβαλοῦσιν οἱ ἐχθροί σου χάρακά σοι καὶ περικυκλώσουσίν σε καὶ συνέξουσίν σε πάντοθεν. Jerome used this paragraph twice, once in Letter 108.8 referring it to David storming Zion. Gregory of Nyssa used it to insult Eunomius.
4 The image is of words falling to the ground unheeded; Jerusalem will have no influence.
An inspection will come from Lord Sabaoth(29:5-6)[[@Bible:Isa 29:5-8]]
5 A series of similes make the point that although the foreign nations who fought against Jerusalem may appear powerful now, this shall pass. The first comparison is to dust.
6 As noted in the comment on 24:22, ἐπισκοπή refers to an examination, often for quality control. In G it is typically the sudden appearance of a superior to ensure standards are being upheld, especially sense this is accompanied with thunder and an earthquake, which are typical accompaniments to God when he appears to humans.
The wealth of the impious is ephemeral(29:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
7 A dream is the next simile indicating the fleeting nature of foreign nations’ wealth. Eusebius interpreted this to refer to Roman luxury (1.95).
8 On the basis of Q and the L family, Ziegler has πεινῶντες for πίνοντες (the reading of S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs). The participle ἐξαναστάντων is a genitive absolute. It is aorist plural, either masculine or neuter in form. The main clause is verbless, and its subject is τὸ ἐνύπνιον. Origen (Comm. Matt. 10.24) has “in Jerusalem” where G has ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος Σιών. God’s holy war in 29:6-8 may have influenced Sib. Or. 3.690 and 3 Macc.
Lord makes you imperceptive(29:9-12)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
9 Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.11) interpreted 29:9-15 as referring to “those who do not believe in Jesus as the Christ,” “the people of the Jews.”
10 This spirit is one of κατανύξεως, which is a state of shock that impairs one’s ability to perceive, think clearly, and express oneself. If οι is an article, the nominate plural οἱ ὁρῶντες τὰ κρυπτά does not match the singular verb καμμύσει. As a relative pronoun (ὃι), it describes the prophets and rulers. Eusebius opted to interpret the translation of Symmachus instead of G. Isa 29:10 is quoted in Rom 11:8 (using the citation formula καθὼς γέγραπται) as Ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς πνεῦμα κατανύξεως, ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ μὴ βλέπειν. Cyprian (Ep. 54.13; Laps. 33) quoted it against lapsed Christians.
11 Rev 5:1 alludes to the sealed book: Καὶ εἶδον ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν τοῦ καθημένου ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου βιβλίον γεγραμμένον ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν, κατεσφραγισμένον σφραγῖσιν ἑπτά. Hippolytus applied 29:11 to the Pharisees, saying, “The things, therefore, which of old were sealed, are now by the grace of God the Lord all open to the saints” (On Isaiah 2.19). Cyprian (Test. 4) did the same.
12 Gregory Thaumaturgus (Homily 3) said the “learned one” to whom the book was revealed was Joseph, husband of Mary. Origen (Comm. Jo. 5.4) appealed to 29:11-12 to argue for the unity of the sacred book.
Hypocrisy of the “wise”(29:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 29:13-14]]
13 Matt 15:8-9 and Mark quote 29:13 in reference to the hypocrites. Mark 7:6 reads, ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· Καλῶς ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἠσαΐας περὶ ὑμῶν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, ὡς γέγραπται ὅτι Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ· Matt 15:8 changes the placement of the demonstrative pronoun to closer match Isaiah, quoting ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ·. Colossians 2:22 quotes the part regarding human commandments and teachings using the words ἅ ἐστιν πάντα εἰς φθορὰν τῇ ἀποχρήσει, κατὰ τὰ ἐντάλματα καὶ διδασκαλίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων;
14 Usually the verb μετατίθημι refers to change of mind (3 Kgdms 20:25; Esth C:24; 2 Macc 4:46; 7:24; 3 Macc 1:16; 4 Macc 2:18), but a change of location is also attested (Deut 27:17; Hos 5:10; Ps 45:3), as is a transformation (Gen 5:24; Isa 29:17). Eusebius here read it as a removal from the blessings of association with Lord: καὶ ὁ πᾶς δὲ αὐτῶν λαὸς μετατεθήσεταί φησι τῆς παρ’ ἐμοὶ τιμῆς. Paul quoted 29:14 in 1 Cor 1:19 in reference to the foolishness of the gospel: ἀπολῶ τὴν σοφίαν τῶν σοφῶν, καὶ τὴν σύνεσιν τῶν συνετῶν ἀθετήσω, changing only the last word. Matthew and Luke 10:21 allude to hiding things from the intelligent. Matt 11:25 has Jesus saying, ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἔκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶν καὶ συνετῶν καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις. Luke 10:21 differs from Matthew only in adding a preposition to the verb: ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἀπέκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶν καὶ συνετῶν καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις.
Woe to schemers(29:15)[[@Bible:Isa 29:15-17]]
15The words ἢ ἃ ἡμεῖς ποιοῦμεν have no equivalent in the Hebrew.
You are the potter’s clay(29:16)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
16 Paul quoted the conversation between the pot and the potter in Rom 9:20: ὦ ἄνθρωπε, μενοῦνγε σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ ἀνταποκρινόμενος τῷ θεῷ; μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι· τί με ἐποίησας οὕτως;
Lebanon will be changed(29:17)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
17 According to Eusebius, Lebanon refers to Gentiles, and Carmel refers to the Jewish nation. He considered being changed into a forest a good thing; now the Gentiles too are included in the abundance (good trees and fruits) that a forest provides.
Fortunes will be reversed on that day(29:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 29:18-21]]
18 The nominative masculine plural article οἱ before the prepositional phrase ἐν τῷ σκότει might be read as referring to people, until the nominative masculine plural noun ὀφθαλμοί is encountered.
The meaning is not that in the darkness and in the fog the eyes of the blind will see, because it is not the verb (seeing) that is modified by prepositional phrases (in the darkness and in the fog), but the noun (the eyes). Jesus alluded to the blind seeing and deaf hearing in reference to his own healing activity, in Matt 11:5 and Luke 7:22. Matthew’s text has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke’s is almost identical, omitting the conjunction a few times: τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Eusebius interpreted the deaf and blind as the Gentiles, and the document as the scriptures.
19 According to Eusebius, the poor and despairing are the idolaters, who (now that the knowledge of God has come to them) now have hope.
The lawless and arrogant are no more(29:20-21)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
20 In the interpretation of Eusebius, the lawless one is the devil, who failed and perished, was arrogant, and enslaved people.
21 The prepositional phrase ἐν ἀδίκοις, modifying the active verb ἐπλαγίασαν, could be instrumental (by unjust [means]). Eusebius followed Symmachus (και εκκλινοντες ματαιως το δικαιον) when he interpreted it to mean futility, as shown by his comments in Comm. Isa. 1.96: οἱ δὲ αὐτοὶ ματαίως ἦσαν ἐκκλίνοντες τὸν δίκαιον and ματαίως δὲ καὶ ἀδίκως τοῦτο πράττοντες.
The house of Jacob will sanctify their God(29:22-23)[[@Bible:Isa 29:22-24]]
22 According to van der Kooij, the Greek of Isa 29:22 shows more of an interest in the priesthood than the Hebrew (van der Kooij 2012). The evidence for this interest in priesthood is the translation of פדה as ἀφώρισεν, on the premise that being separated from Abraham refers to the selection of Levi’s tribe for the priesthood (77). ἀφώρισεν is an appropriate translation if the translator thought the purpose of the priesthood was to redeem the offspring of Abraham (Num 3:13 and 8:11).
23 The Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9) alludes to the sanctification of the name with Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου·
They will learn(29:24)[[@Bible:Isa 29:9-10]]
24 According to Eusebius (1.97), those deceived are the unbeleiving Gentiles, and the prophecy foretells them coming to know the scriptures and God.
Woe to those who trust in Egypt(30:1-5)[[@Bible:Isa 30:1-5]]
1 The plural of the masculine noun ἀποστάτης (rebel) is in apposition to the neuter noun τέκνα (children).
2 Because the infinitive τοῦ βοηθηθῆναι has the genitive article, it expresses purpose; it is not the complement of ἐπερώτησαν. To convey the same meaning in English a comma was added between “did not ask me” and “to be helped.”
3 According to Keunjoo Kim, G strengthened the warning not to trust in Egypt. Referring to Sollamo’s work on the letter of Aristeas (Sollamo 2001), Kim explained that the translator’s community, who lived in Egypt, felt uncomfortable with the scripture’s warning not to return to Egypt, and so they needed to hear that their protection was not from Egypt but from God (2009, 141).
4 Kim discussed the “nation which will not benefit” in 30:4 (2009, 138), saying “what is at stake is under whose protection they are.”
5 Rahlfs put μάτην κοπιάσουσιν at the end of verse 4, Swete and Ziegler at the beginning of verse 5. Kim translated μάτην as “in vain” (Kim 2009, 139). The Hebrew behind ὄνειδος, חרפה, is not the same as in verse 3, כלמה.
The vision of the desert animals(30:6-11)[[@Bible:Isa 30:6-7]]
6 The words ἡ ὅρασις τῶν τετραπόδων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ are indented within the column, and the epsilon in the next line’s ἐν is oversized to mark distinction between title and the beginning of the vision. Kim claimed verses 6-7 should be read with 1-5 (Kim 2009, 137); Q’s paragraph spacing suggests a separation between 1-5 and 6-7. The verb ὠφελήσει is impersonal. The Hebrew behind ὄνειδος, חרפה, is the same as in verse 5.
7 The neuter plurals μάταια καὶ κενά must be accusative, since a masculine nominative is already present in the clause. A double accusative is typically used with ὠφελέω to (1) indicate the person benefitted and (2) the way in which that person is benefitted, as in 1 Corinthians 14:6. The meaning is that they are benefitted to no avail and ineffectively. Although spelled the same as the first μάταια, the accent on the final Ματαία is not the same because it is feminine singular, to match παράκλησις. Kim noted that of all the LXX books, Isaiah has the most instances of μάτην or μάταιος in texts at variance to the MT (Kim 2009, 139).
8 The expression ὅτι ἔσται εἰς ἡμέρας καιρῶν ταῦτα is obscure, and Eusebius is no help because he does not comment on this verse. The Hebrew here is ותהי ליום אחרון לעד. Ottley suggested καιρῶν might be a misunderstanding of לעד. Usually καιρός refers to a fitting period of time, an occasion. The plural form is used eschatologically in Tobit 14:5. The collocation with days may derive from Genesis 1:14. Rev 1:11 shares some phrasing with Isa 30:8, with its ὃ βλέπεις γράψον εἰς βιβλίον καὶ πέμψον ταῖς ἑπτὰ ἐκκλησίαις.
9 Eusebius explained that what the people resisted was the prophet’s advice not to return to Egypt (1.98).
10 Eusebius presumed that Isaiah and his allies were told these exact words rejecting their advice. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. Illum. 14.14) quoted “tell us another deception” in describing the lie the soldiers in Matt 28:13 were advised to tell about how Jesus’ body disappeared.
11 Where Q, S, A, and B have τὸ λόγιον, Rahlfs and Ziegler have τὸν ἅγιον, from a conjecture by Grabe (1730), supported by V and Symmachus. The letters A and Λ are easily confused. The final Ν on the article could be easily missed if written as an overbar over the preceding letter instead of as an independent letter.
Your sin will be like a collapsing wall(30:12-14)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
13
The genitive participle phrase πόλεως ὀχυρᾶς ἑαλωκυίας could be a genitive absolute, in which case it indicates the time when the wall falls (“when a secure city has been captured”). But more likely the genitive is the qualifier of the wall (“a falling wall of a secure city that has been captured”). The adverb παραχρῆμα indicates something closely following another in time.
14 Swete spelled ἀγγείου as ἀγγίου. Not only is the fall immediate, it is irreparable.
The object of your trust will backfire(30:15-17)[[@Bible:Isa 30:15-18]]
15 Where Q, S, A (Ziegler) have ἐβούλεσθε, S and the first-hand of B (Rahlfs) have ἠβούλεσθε. An aorist participle such as ἀποστραφείς would typically indicate an action that took place prior to the finite verb (στενάξῃς): turning back, then groaning, then being saved. But that is not a strict rule, as the well-known expression ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν demonstrates. In English we can convey a similar meaning equally idiomatically by joining two finite verbs with “and” (“turn and groan”).
16 Isaiah ironically turns the confident boast that horses would enable them to flee (safely) into a curse that yes, indeed, they will have to flee. Eusebius added that although they flee, they would not be able to escape Babylon and Egypt.
17 The addressees will be so frightened that even though they outnumber their attackers, they will flee. Eusebius (1.98) noted that a pole was raised by sinking ships, presumably as an SOS call much as a flare might be used today.
God will have pity on you(30:18)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
18 Not all will be destroyed; a remnant of the faithful will survive because of God’s mercy.
Blessed are those who remain faithful(30:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 30:18-23]]
19 Διότι (a contraction of διὰ τοῦτο ὅτι) indicates the cause for something, not its effect.
Lord will give you scarcity(30:20-21)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
20 Ottley rejected the suggestion that πλανῶντες (“deceivers”) indicates that G read מנדי (from נדד “wander”) for מורי “teachers”; preferring the explanation
that πλανῶντες simply translates מורי and adds the clarification that the teaching is false.
21 Eusebius explained that the returnees from Babylon in the time of Ezra experienced hardship, but because their eyes could now recognize their deceivers, their ears did not receive the deceptive words (1.99).
Fertility will be restored(30:22–24)[[@Bible:Isa 30:23-25]]
22 The expression λεπτὰ ποιήσεις is similar to that in Exod 32:20 (κατήλεσεν λεπτόν), where the golden calf was pulverized, and to 4 Kingdoms 23:6 (ἐλέπτυνεν εἰς χοῖν), where Josiah pulverized the Asherah.
24 The accusative participles ἀναπεποιημένα and λελικμημένα modify ἄχυρα, not κριθῇ.
Running water on mountains and hills(30:25)[[@Bible:Isa 30:12-14]]
25 The restoration of fertility is symbolized by an abundance of running water. Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.2) interpreted “every” mountain and hill to mean that the abundance would be universal. Eusebius explained that this happened after Jerusalem was restored, and connected the abundance of water with the desire for proper behaviour: βιάζεται καὶ τὸν μὴ θέλοντα ἐπὶ τροπολογίαν σπεύδειν (1.99).
The day Lord heals his people(30:26)[[@Bible:Isa 30:26]]
26 According to Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.2), the injury that is to be healed is the result of Adam’s sin: death. This is to be healed at the final resurrection.
Lord’s wrath will trouble nations(30:27-28)[[@Bible:Isa 30:27-28]]
28 Because it follows a preposition, πλανήσει must be the noun πλάνησις rather than the verb from which it derives, πλανάω. This root carries the sense of misleading, commonly with regard to one’s thinking being led astray. In Isaiah this meaning is more idiomatically rendered as deception.
Is rejoicing necessary?(30:29)[[@Bible:Isa 30:29-30]]
29 The first-hand of Marchalianus wrote τοῦ θεοῦ; Q’s marginal note reads τοῦ Κυρίου ΠΙΠΙ, transliterating the tetragrammaton; Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus (Rahlfs) have τοῦ Κυρίου, but Vaticanus (Ziegler) omits τοῦ.
The wrath of God’s arm(30:30)[[@Bible:Isa 30:29-30]]
30 Although δεῖξαι is the reading in Q and all three oldest uncials, Rahlfs and Ziegler have δεῖξει, on the basis of V. Swete spelled συγκαταφερομένη as συνκαταφερομένη.
Assyrians will be defeated(30:31-33)[[@Bible:Isa 30:31-33]]
31 The voice of the Lord will defeat the Assyrians. The particle ἄν typically denotes contingency, often (as here) corresponding to the English “ever.” According to BDAG, when with a future apodosis (such as πατάξῃ here), the action could be repeated or singular. The contingency is difficult to express in English without diluting the certainty of the action itself. It is the timing of the blow that is indefinite. Eusebius explained that the Assyrians stand for any arrogant tyrants (1.100).
32 The referent of the third person singular pronoun “him” is not provided in the context; it would not be Lord because he has no need of aid. The plural “they” who will make war are identified by Eusebius as demons (1.100).
33 For reading ἀπαιτηθήσῃ (the reading of Q, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), S corrector cb3 has ἀπαιτηθήσει (the original hand of Sinaiticus wrote ἀπετηθήσει); Ziegler has ἀπατηθήσῃ, which is attested in Greek manuscripts from the 9th century on, but also in Theodoret and Jerome. The passive of ἀπαιτέω is rare; ἀπαιτέω in the active voice means demand repayment. Instead of the more grammatical σοί (the reading also of Swete, Rahlfs, and Ziegler), S, A, and B* have σύ. Revelation 19:20 alludes to the fire and brimstone: καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας
τῇ εἰκόνι αὐτοῦ· ζῶντες ἐβλήθησαν οἱ δύο εἰς τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρὸς τῆς καιομένης ἐν θείῳ. The lake of Revelation is inspired by the deep valley of Isaiah.
Woe to those depending on Egypt(31:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 31:1-2]]
1 Kim noted that G makes more clear than MT the contrast between what Israel did and did not trust (Kim 2009, 147).
2 In the absence of punctuation between καὶ αὐτὸς σοφός and ἦγεν ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς κακά, the nominative singulars αὐτὸς σοφός should be taken as the subject of ἦγεν and not as a separate nominal clause such as “And he is wise; he kept bringing evils on them.” The σοφός is a substantival use of the adjective, and αὐτός is emphatic. Kim noted two differences from MT: the emphasis on the word of God, and the paraphrase of “against their vain hope” (Kim 2009, 148).
3 Κύριος here has the article. The verb ἐπάγω denotes causing motion over or on something. Typically this involves hostile intent (Isa 1:25; 42:25; 26:14; GELS) or is otherwise something bad (BDAG). Punishment is specifically involved in Exodus 32:24; 34:7. So this should not be interpreted as God’s protective hand. Kim’s interpretation is “that Egypt is, actually, horseflesh, not to be trusted and not to be hoped in” (Kim 2009, 148).
Lord Sabaoth will fight Mount Zion(31:4-9)[[@Bible:Isa 31:4-5]]
4 Two near synonyms βοήσῃ and κεκράξῃ are used; Louw-Nida associates unusually loud volume with βοάω and an unpleasant sound with κράζω.
5 The near-synonyms σῴζω and ἐξαιρέομαι both denote rescue from danger; σῴζω also implies restoration to well-being (Louw-Nida). Strikingly, verses 4 and 5 contrast in Lord’s treatment of Jerusalem: in verse 4 he attacks Mount Zion but in verse 5 he rescues and shields Jerusalem. Eusebius indicated the
verse 4 attack is against the enemies of Jerusalem (who were occupying the city when the exiles returned), thereby protecting his people who are about to inhabit the city (2.1). Luke 13:34 echoes the image of the bird protecting her young under her wings, with the words Ἰερουσαλὴμ Ἰερουσαλήμ, ἡ ἀποκτείνουσα τοὺς προφήτας καὶ λιθοβολοῦσα τοὺς ἀπεσταλμένους πρὸς αὐτήν, ποσάκις ἠθέλησα ἐπισυνάξαι τὰ τέκνα σου ὃν τρόπον ὄρνις τὴν ἑαυτῆς νοσσιὰν ὑπὸ τὰς πτέρυγας, καὶ οὐκ ἠθελήσατε.
[[@Bible:Isa 31:6-9]]
6 Theophilus of Antioch (Autol. 3.9) used 31:6 to show that God has always desired repentance. The Exhortation to Repentance attributed to Cyprian uses 31:6 to show that all sins may be forgiven.
7 Joseph and Aseneth 10.12 alludes to 31:7, with its gold and silver idols: Καὶ ἔλαβε πάντας τοὺς θεοὺς αὐτῆς τοὺς χρυσοῦς καὶ ἀργυροῦς, ὧν οὐκ ἦν ἀριθμός.
8 The combination of εἰμί with εἰς indicates becoming.
A just king will reign(31:9-32:7)[[@Bible:Isa 31:9-32:4]]
9 The section break was disputed already in the time of Eusebius, who noted that the Septuagint has the section begin with τάδε λέγει Κύριος (as in Marchalianus and Sinaiticus), but other translations begin a section after this clause: κατὰ δὲ τοὺς λοιποὺς ἑρμηνευτὰς ἐπειδὴ τὸ φησὶ κύριος τῇ ἀνωτέρῳ διανοίᾳ συνῆψαν τὰ προκείμενα ἐξ ἑτέρας ἀρχῆς ἰδιαζούσης προσηνέγκαντο (2.2). Irenaeus (Haer. 5.34.3) took 31:9-32:1 as a prediction of the earthly kingdom of Christians after their resurrection.
1 Since the ruler will be δίκαιος, and the rule will be with κρίσεως, justice will be the defining characteristic of this kingdom.
2 The presence of the article on ὁ ἄνθρωπος means the clause cannot be rendered as “And there is a man who is hiding his words.” That would be the meaning if ἄνθρωπος ὁ were written instead. Σιών translates the consonants but not the vowel pointing of the MT’s צָיוֹן. The feminine dative singular present participle διψώσῃ modifies γῇ. The contract vowel (lexical form διψάω) contracts with the ου to form ω.
3 Presumably if the people’s trust is no longer in humans, it will be in God.
4 The verb προσέχω denotes paying close attention with effort. This is conveyed better in English by “endeavor” than “try,” which can imply failure.
5 In this new kingdom, fools will no longer be the rulers. According to Eusebius, the righteous king gave the apostles the rule of his church, and no longer will polytheistic and godless teachers rule (2.2).
6 The phrase τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας κενὰς ποιῆσαι has a verb that can take a double accusative, one of which is a noun (in this case a noun phrase, τὰς ψυχὰς τὰς διψώσας), and the other an adjective (κενάς). The resulting meaning is to make these souls empty, i.e., to empty them.
7 The noun βουλή can refer to the capacity to make wise decisions, the activity of deciding, the information used in making a decision, the resulting decision, or an official decision-making group. In the prophets, most often βουλή signifies the result of deliberation, the object of one’s will, or what one tries to cause. But here βουλή is the subject of the verb βουλεύσεται, so the decision-making group is meant.
The council of the pious(32:8)[[@Bible:Isa 30:29-30]]
8 Retaining the meaning of βουλή from the preceding verse, here again it should be taken to refer to the body of deliberators. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 2.15) used 32:8 to show human moral choices are within our power.
Wealthy women, the harvest has been consumed(32:9-10)[[@Bible:Isa 32:9-13]]
9 Tertullian (Marc. 4.19) said the rich women following Christ were the wealthy ladies prophesied by Isaiah in 32:9-10.
10 The form of the noun ἡμέρας is ambiguous; it could be accusative plural (days of a year) or genitive singular (a year’s day). Eusebius took it as a plural (μνείαν
ποιήσασθαι ἐνιαυτοῦ τινος ἡμερῶν), yielding a sentence with a double accusative. In his interpretation, the year referred to is the year of the Lord’s favour quoted by Jesus in Luke 4:18, i.e., the time of Jesus’ ministry on earth.
Confident women, grieve the coming loss(32:10-14)[[@Bible:Isa 32:9-13]]
10
11 Because all the women’s resources have been used up, the time of want is coming. According to Eusebius, the wealth symbolizes luxury and former disbelief. Girding one’s loins is a masculine act (2.3).
12 The noun ἐπιθύμημα normally refers to an object of desire rather than the emotion of desire (but note Isa 27:2). Ottley has “a field of desire;” Brenton has “pleasant field,” which is the gloss provided in LEH. Eusebius, too, interpreted it as an attributive genitive, calling this the ἐπιθυμητὸν ἀμπελῶνα from Isa 27:2 (2.3). The genitives ἀμπέλου γενήματος are ambiguous regarding which is the head noun: “a vine’s produce” or “a produce’s vine,” but only one of these makes sense.
13 The nouns ἄκανθα καὶ χόρτος are nominative, but so is ἡ γῆ. The subject of the singular ἀναβήσεται is more likely ἡ γῆ, with the thorns and grass indicating what the land will become. Alternatively, ἡ γῆ could be casus pendens, in which case a translation as “As for the land, thorns and grass will come up” would be appropriate; although this requires that a singular verb have a plural subject, it is not an impossible interpretation.
Chermel will be deserted(32:15-19)[[@Bible:Isa 32:14-19]]
15 Acts 1:8 alludes to the spirit coming upon people in Isa 32:15 with the words ἀλλὰ λήμψεσθε δύναμιν ἐπελθόντος τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς.
16 Eusebius connected the mention of Carmel and the forest to a similar prophecy in Isaiah 29:17. There, the forest was a symbol of abundance, but here he points out that forests consist of trees that do not produce fruit (2.3).
17 The phrase πεποιθότες ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος cannot be a clause on its own because it has no verb; it must be in apposition to the nominative from the preceding clause. The manuscript Eusebius used likely had ἔσονται (as A and
Scb2), since he paraphrased, ἔσεσθαι ἐν αὐτῇ ἔργα δικαιοσύνης, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔσονταί φησιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ταύτῃ πεποιθότες ἕως τοῦ αἰῶνος. Paul alluded to the connection between righteousness, trust, and peace, in Romans 5:1, Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεόν. The wording of James 3:18 is even closer: καρπὸς δὲ δικαιοσύνης ἐν εἰρήνῃ σπείρεται τοῖς ποιοῦσιν εἰρήνην.
18 The participle πεποιθώς is nominative masculine singular, modifying λαός.
19 Those who are protected are now addressed in the second person, “you” (ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς), whom the hail will not touch. The words οὐκ ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς ἥξει καὶ ἔσονται οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες … πεποιθότες have no correspondence in the Hebrew, which says only “And it hails at the coming down of the forest, and the city will become low in humiliation.” Van der Vorm-Croughs suggested, “The final words of 32:19 in the Hebrew—ריעה לפשת הלפשבו רעיה—have been entirely rearranged in the Greek. While רעיה and הלפשבו are used with a different function, לפשת ריעה has been omitted. The new sentence in the LXX has been complemented with the words καὶ ἔσονται οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες and πεποιθότες ὡς, which may additionally serve to tie v.19 to vv.17–18 more closely” (2014, 325).
Blessed are those who sow on every water(32:20)[[@Bible:Isa 32:20-33:1]]
20 Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 6.1) quoted Isa 32:20 to show that the labour is justified. According to Eusebius, the water symbolizes the scriptures, the ox is the Jews, and the donkey is the Gentiles.
Woe to those who distress you(33:1)[[@Bible:Isa 32:20-33:1]]
1 The accusative pronoun ὑμᾶς could be the object of either ἀθετῶν or ἀθετεῖ, leaving the other without an object. Because this participle is so commonly used in Isaiah (21:2; 24:16; 31:1; 48:8), “rebel” is a more suitable translation than “reject.” Only in Isa 1:2; 63:8 is the participle form absent. Luke 10:16 echoes Isa 33:1, with its ὁ ἀθετῶν ὑμᾶς ἐμὲ ἀθετεῖ. The prevalence of ἡττάομαι in Isa 30-33 is because these chapters describe the result of placing one’s trust in human rather than divine power. It appears in 30:31; 31:4; 31:9; and now in 33:1; the noun ἥττημα appears also in 31:8.
Lord, have pity on us(33:2-4)[[@Bible:Isa 33:2-4]]
2 As Ottley noted, the transition here is abrupt, but Eusebius connected these blessed people with those who sowed the seed, namely the apostles. According to him, the resistance is to the evangelical preaching, and Lord is the salvation of the apostles (2.4). G read זרע “seed” instead of זרוע “arm,” and בגדים “resistant” instead of לבקרים “in the morning.”
3 According to Eusebius, it was the Jewish nation who was scattered to the nations (2.4).
4 Although the addressee “you” is still Lord, Eusebius instead said it was the Jewish nation who was mocked (2.4). G sometimes adds μικροῦ καὶ μεγάλου with no Hebrew basis (9:14; 22:5, 24; 33:19).
Store–houses of righteousness(33:5-9)[[@Bible:Isa 33:5-9]]
5 According to Eusebius (2.4), the “desert” (32:16) is now named Zion, which symbolizes the church of Christ.
6 Ottley wrote that ἐν νόμῳ “may be an attempt to render אמונת, ‘faithfulness,’ a plural form: or can LXX. have read אמרה, in the sense of ‘command,’ ‘appointment’? In Nehem. 11:23, אמונה is ‘a settled provision,’ R.V.; LXX. omit the clause. The sentence runs somewhat like the opening of 34:16, and παραδοθήσονται almost warns us that LXX. are in difficulties. עתיך, ‘thy times,’ has evidently been misread: the obscure word עתיק suggests itself (23:18 fin.) but does not give any help” (2:270).
7 The prophecy reassures the audience that the tables will be turned so that the fearsome will be fearful. The papyri in the national library at Vienna numbered G 17417 and G 23164, include text from Isaiah 33:7-8, 17-19; 40:13-14, 24-26 (Bastianini 1982; Wessely 1909). This manuscript dates from the third century CE, and Rahlfs gave them the sigla 881 and 0948 (Rahlfs and Fraenkel 2004, 393–94). Likely it is from the same manscript as papyrus G 2320. Where Q and B have οὗτοι, S and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have αὐτοὶ. Weis noted that the reading ἐν τῷ φόβῳ ὑμῶν αὐτοὶ φοβηθήσονται implies not a single word אֶרְאֶלָּם but two words ארא לם, as in 1QIsaa (Weis 1991).
8 Eusebius noted that the phrase “the fear of the nations has ceased” is missing in the Hebrew and other translations. Ottley attempted an explanation: “The easiest supposition seems to be, that, confusing the two expressions, עבר ארח ‘wayfaring man’ and מאס ערים ‘he despiseth the cities,’ they omitted the first, and put the second in its place, reading עמים ‘peoples’ for ערים, and perhaps taking מאס, in the sense of מסס, of fainting for fear. Whether עבר was conversely read after ‘covenant,’ and הפר, ‘he hath broken,’ omitted, or the latter paraphrased as αἴρεται, it is hardly possible to say” (Ottley 1904). Note the Dead Sea Scroll (1QIsaa) has עדים in place of ערים.
9 Ottley suggested G read גמא instead of קמל “withers,” and ערבים, “willows” instead of כערבה “like a desert.” According to Eusebius, “Lebanon” refers to Jerusalem, as in Zechariah 11:1 and Ezekiel 17:3-4, and being put to shame refers to the cessation of sacrifice (2.4).
Now I will be exalted and you will see(33:10-22)[[@Bible:Isa 33:10-12]]
10 The reversal indicated in the preceding paragraph now has a cause: Lord will arise. Despite the combination of resurrection (ἀναστήσομαι), glorification (δοξασθήσομαι), and exaltation (ὑψωθήσομαι). Eusebius did not understand Isaiah 33:10 as a prophecy of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. In his Commentary on Isaiah 2.4, all he had to say is, Ὁ μὲν οὖν φιλάνθρωπος θεὸς “ἀγγέλους ἀπέστειλεν εἰρήνης” πρὸς τὸν Ἰουδαίων λαὸν “πικρῶς κλαίοντας καὶ παρακαλοῦντας” ἀποδέξασθαι τὴν εὐαγγελιζομένην αὐτοῖς “εἰρήνην.” ἐπεὶ δὲ οὐκ ἐδέξαντο αὐτούς, ἐπιφέρει φάσκων· νῦν ἀναστήσομαι, λέγει κύριος, νῦν δοξασθήσομαι, νῦν ὑψωθήσομαι· νῦν ὄψεσθε, νῦν αἰσθηθήσεσθε, τὴν δευτέραν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔνδοξον παρουσίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενος, καθʼ ἣν ὄψονται καὶ αἴσθησιν αὐτοῦ τῆς θεότητος λήψονται. τότε δὲ δοξασθήσεται αὐτὸς καὶ ὑψωθήσεται. καὶ τότε γνώσονται, ὅτι ματαία ἦν ἄρα ἡ ἰσχὺς τοῦ πνεύματος αὐτῶν· πῦρ γὰρ κατέδεται αὐτούς, διὸ εἰς αὐτῶν πρόσωπον εἴρηται· ματαία ἡ ἰσχὺς τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν, πῦρ κατέδεται ὑμᾶς. In short, he blamed Jews for rejecting the prophets, and said this prophecy refers to the second coming (τὴν δευτέραν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔνδοξον παρουσίαν) because of the following verse, with no mention of resurrection. The only other early commentator (before the middle of the 4th century) who had anything to say about Isaiah 33:10 was Cyprian. In Test. 2.26 he linked Daniel 7:13-14, Isaiah 33:10-11, Psalm 110:1-2, Revelation 1:12-18, and Matt 28:18-20 to show that after his resurrection, Christ would receive all power from the Father.
11 When Lord arises and is exalted, the addressees both benefit (in seeing and perceiving) and suffer (in being devoured by fire). Ottley suggested G read תראו or תחזו instead of תהרו “you will conceive” and תבושו “be ashamed” instead of חשׁשׁ “dry grass.” Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 10) quoted 33:11 to warn his readers of the penalty of disobedience.
12 Scholz suggested G read שׂדה “field” instead of שׂיד “lime.” According to Eusebius, the addressees are the nations since they will be burned (2.4).
13 Barnabas 9.1 quotes 33:13 as a prophecy of the circumcision of Christian ears: Ἀκοῇ ἀκούσονται οἱ πόρρωθεν, ἅ ἐποίησα γνώσονται. Justin (Dial. 70) quoted 33:13-19 as a prophecy of the bread and cup Christ gave “us,” and of the appearance of glorified Christ to Christians: Ἀκούσατε, οἱ πόῤῥωθεν, ἃ ἐποίησα· γνώσονται οἱ ἐγγίζοντες τὴς ἰσχύν μου. Ἀπέστησαν οἱ ἐν Σιὼν ἄνομοι· λήψεται τρόμος τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς. Τίς ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν τὸν τόπον τὸν αἰώνιον; Πορευόμενος ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, λαλῶν εὐθεῖαν ὁδὸν, μισῶν ἀνομίαν καὶ ἀδικίαν, καὶ τὰς χεῖρας ἀφωσιωμένος ἀπὸ δώρων, βαρύνων ὦτα ἵνα μὴ ἀκούσῃ κρίσιν ἄδικον αἵματος, καμμύων τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἵνα μὴ ἴδῃ ἀδικίαν· οὗτος οἰκήσει ἐν ὑψηλῷ σπηλαίῳ πέτρας ἰσχυρᾶς. Ἄρτος δοθήσεται αὐτῷ, καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ πιστόν. Βασιλέα μετὰ δόξης ὄψεσθε, καὶ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὑμῶν ὄψονται πόῤῥωθεν. Ἡ ψυχὴ ὑμῶν μελετήσει φόβον κυρίου. Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ γραμματικός; Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱ βουλεύοντες; Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ ἀριθμῶν τοὺς τρεφομένους, μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν λαόν; Ὧι οὐ συνεβουλεύσαντο, οὐδὲ ᾔδεισαν βάθη φωνῶν, ὥστε μὴ ἀκοῦσαι· λαὸς πεφαυλισμένος, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι τῷ ἀκούοντι σύνεσις.
14 The rhetorical questions ask who will warn about a fire and an eternal place. Although Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13) quoted 33:14-16 as a prophecy of the “eternal place,” that is heaven, Eusebius considered the eternal place and the fire one and the same, and therefore is the place prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt 25:41). Although G usually translated חנפים as ἄνομοι (9:17; 10:6; 24:5; 32:6), here we have ἀσεβεῖς. Ottley suggested G read יגיד “make known” instead of יגור “soujourn.” Scholz suggested G read מקום instead of מוקדי “burnings.”
15 As Scholz suggested, G chose μισῶν because of its phonological similarity to מאס. According to Eusebius, these witnesses are the prophets, every god-loving person, and especially the apostles (2.5).
16 Barnabas 11.4-5 quotes 33:16 as prophecy of Jesus’ baptism (water) and crucifixion (rock): κατοικήσεις ἐν ὑψηλῷ σπηλαίῳ πέτρας ἰσχυρᾶς καί· τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ πιστόν· βασιλέα μετὰ δόξης ὄψεσθε, καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ ὑμῶν μελετή̀σει φόβον κυρίου. This passage interprets the “king in his glory” as the Son (at baptism).
17 Cyprian (Test. 2.29) quoted 33:17 as a prophecy of the eternal reign of Christ. Tertullian (Adv. Jud. 13) quoted it as prophecy of Christ’s miracles in the presence of the Jews (“you will see the king with his glory”), and of the prohibition against Jews living in their land (“you shall see the land from afar”). Hippolytus (Antichr. 44) quoted it as a prophecy of Jesus’ second advent.
18 Note the difference between Rahlfs (τρεφομένους, B) and Ziegler (συστρεφομένους, Q, S, and A). The use of φόβος in a positive context calls for closer inspection. Muraoka presents three clusters of meaning for this noun (dread, reverence, and an object of fear). The one that most suits being the object of a verb (as of μελετάω here) is an object of fear, i.e., that which/whom is feared, which is also appropriate in Isa 8:12-13; 24:17-18; Gen 31:42; Dan 11:31. Nevertheless, Eusebius interpreted the fear here in light of what precedes, explaining that those cast out far from this land “will fall into fear of their condemnation” (2.5). On the meaning of μελετάω see the discussion on 38:14.
18 Eusebius identified the addressees here as the scribes and Pharisees condemned by Jesus in Matt 23:13. He repeatedly qualified the gathering with κολακείαις “with flattery”: ὁ ἀριθμῶν τοὺς τρεφομένους, μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν λαόν, ᾧ οὐ συνεβουλεύσαντο, κολακείαις δὲ αὐτοὺς τρέφοντες διέστρεφον. Ottley suggested that τρεφομένους, the reading of B (Rahlfs and Eusebius), is the only one that corresponds to the Hebrew, and that συσ– may have been prefixed to the verb in almost all other manuscripts under the influence of the preceding τους. Paul alluded to 33:18 in 1 Cor 1:20 as follows: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; ποῦ συζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
19 The translation συνεβουλεύσαντο indicates that G read נועץ “was counselled” where MT has נועז “be insolent.” The masculine singular relative pronoun most simply refers back to the people. The dative with συμβουλεύω indicates who was consulted, as in Herodotus, Histories 2.107.2 συμβουλεύεσθαι τῇ γυναικί, so in this case an unspecified plural “they” did not consult the people. The syntax of this verse is difficult in Greek. Ottley has “with whom they took not counsel, nor knew he them: deep of speech, so that he heard them not: (it is) a despised people, and there is no understanding to him that heareth.” Silva has “They took no counsel with him, nor did he know deep speech, so that a despised people could not hear, and there is no understanding to the one who hears.” Eusebius evidently had some difficulty too; he brought in Symmachus as a clearer translation. Eusebius continued to apply this prophecy to Jesus’ opponents, saying they are the despised people who cannot understand the people of deep speech (2.5).
20 The phrase Ἰδοὺ Σιὼν ἡ πόλις τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν has no verb, so it could be interpreted as an equative verbless clause “Look, the city of Sion is our salvation!” (Silva) or as an exclamation “Look, the city of Sion, our salvation!” (Brenton and Ottley). Eusebius is not much help; in his interpretation of the LXX he said we are invited to look at the city that is is called our salvation (τὴν πόλιν τὴν καλουμένην τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν). The phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον appears in Isaiah also in 9:6; 13:20 (which translates the same Hebrew as 33:20); 14:20; 18:7; 34:10, 17. Outside of Isaiah, it appears in the translated LXX only in Exodus 14:13, as well as in Judith 15:10; Pss. Sol. 15:13; Baruch 3:32. Because αἰῶνα is not an adjective but rather a noun like χρόνον, the relationship between the two nouns deserves some explanation. Eusebius saw no need to explain the grammar here; to him it means the stakes of this new city will be immovable, in contrast to the shakings it had experienced in the past. Irenaeus (Haer. 3.20.4) quoted 33:20 as a prophecy that Christ the savior would be visible, since it says, “your eyes shall see our salvation.”
21 There is no difference in meaning between διώρυγες (the reading also of S, A, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) and διώρυχες (the reading of B); both mean canals. The active participle ἐλαῦνον “driving” modifies πλοῖον “ship,” not the verb “go” adverbially.
22 Τhe Acts of Pilate 16 (first Greek form) has the Jewish people quoting 33:22 in reference to the one Lord of Israel. In Sinaiticus, corrector ca corrected the mistaken reading originally penned by scribe B “my God is Megar” to “my God is great,” which is what all other witnesses have.
The sin has been forgiven(33:23-24)[[@Bible:Isa 33:22-24]]
23 Ottley pointed out that it is unclear whether the metaphor with its cords, pole, and tarp envisages a ship or a tent, but Eusebius clearly understood it as a ship (ἐρράγη τὰ σχοινία καὶ ὁ ἱστὸς δὲ αὐτῆς ὡσπερεί τινος νηὸς ἐν χειμῶσι καὶ κλύδωσι, 2.6).
24 Acts 10:43 may be alluding to this forgiveness of sins as what is mentioned by prophets, in its statement, τούτῳ πάντες οἱ προφῆται μαρτυροῦσιν ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν λαβεῖν διὰ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ πάντα τὸν πιστεύοντα εἰς αὐτόν.
Lord’s anger is against all the nations(34:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 34:1-4]]
1 Nations, rulers, the land, and its inhabitants are all summoned. The translation of לאמים “peoples” as ἄρχοντες has precedent in Gen 27:29 and occurs again in Isa 41:1; 43:4, 9. Eusebius interpreted γῆ (land) to mean the οἰκουμένη (world).
2 The nations are summoned to learn of their destruction because of Lord’s wrath.
3 The extent of the destruction is presented in physiological and sensual images of rising odor and blood-drenched mountains.
Sword and land drunk with blood and fat(34:4–10)[[@Bible:Isa 34:5-7]]
5 Jerome used this verse to show that even heaven is imperfect; how much more so the earth.
7 The preposition ἀπό is not the typical way to express what is causing drunkenness in Greek; here in both instances the translator used it because it is a formal equivalent of the Hebrew מ. In verse 6, the same idea is expressed without ἀπό, in ἡ μάχαιρα Κυρίου ἐνεπλήσθη αἵματος, because there the Hebrew has no מ. Revelation 17:6 alludes to the image of being drunk from blood, in the words καὶ εἶδον τὴν γυναῖκα μεθύουσαν ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος τῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος τῶν μαρτύρων Ἰησοῦ.
8 Matthew 11:22 echoes the day of judgement, with the words Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως ἢ ὑμῖν.
9 Because it is in parallel with pitch, θεῖον here is not the accusative of the adjective θεῖος “divine” but the neuter noun θεῖον, sulfur, i.e. brimstone.
10 The genitives of time νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας indicate when the burning takes place. See the note at 33:20 regarding the phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα χρόνον. Revelation 14:11 alludes to the smoke going up forever, night and day: καὶ ὁ καπνὸς τοῦ βασανισμοῦ αὐτῶν εἰς αἰῶνας αἰώνων ἀναβαίνει, καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἀνάπαυσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς οἱ προσκυνοῦντες τὸ θηρίον καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα αὐτοῦ. Revelation 18:18 mentions the smoke: καὶ ἔκραζον βλέποντες τὸν καπνὸν τῆς πυρώσεως αὐτῆς. Revelation 19:3 again alludes to the eternally rising smoke: καὶ ὁ καπνὸς αὐτῆς ἀναβαίνει εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.
Creatures and spirits will occupy the land(34:10–17)[[@Bible:Isa 34:8-15]]
11 Swete spelled ἴβεις the way it is spelled in Q, εἴβεις. A σπαρτίον is a diminuitive σπάρτον, “cord;” commonly it is used for measuring (Jer 52:21; Ezek 40:3; Job 38:5), which is how it is used here, namely for measuring land (“geo-metry”). Brenton, Ottley, and Silva all call this the measuring line of desolation,
but I see no precedent for rendering this substantive adjective as an abstract noun. When used substantivally, it refers to a desolate place. Rev 18:2 alludes to the habitation of mythical beings, birds, and mixed creatures, with the words: καὶ ἐγένετο κατοικητήριον δαιμονίων καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς πνεύματος ἀκαθάρτου καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς ὀρνέου ἀκαθάρτου [καὶ φυλακὴ παντὸς θηρίου ἀκαθάρτου] καὶ μεμισημένου. Emerton argued (against Ziegler 1934, 70, 142) that G should not be used to posit an original Hebrew text longer than the MT, which included the statement that satyrs would dwell there. Emerton’s suggestion is that σπαρτίον γεωμετρίας ἐρήμου corresponds to קו תהו, that G read בהו as בה “in her,” and ואיי instead of ואבני. It is therefore unnecessary to posit a Hebrew text containing the words ושעירים ישבו בה, which were translated by G yet the words ואבני בהו were not (Emerton 1982a).
12 The desolation of the land leads to anarchy. The Hebrew corresponding to οἱ ἄρχοντες αὐτῆς is חריה. G read אין without the conjunction instead of ואין, he read מלכיה instead of מלוכה, and וקראיה instead of יקראו. Eusebius saw the fulfilment of this prophecy in the expulsion of Jews from Jerusalem.
13 Ziegler pointed to 35:7 to support the reading ἔπαυλις (in Q, S*, Rahlfs, and Ziegler); it was changed by corrector cb3 to the plural ἐπαύλεις, which matches the reading of A and B.
14 Note the difference between Rahlfs (βοήσουσιν, the reading of S*) and Ziegler (βοήσονται, the reading of Q, Scb2, A, and B). The rough breathing mark on αὑτοῖς is to indicate this is a reflexive pronoun. As in 34:11, allusions to this verse imply that mythical creatures were considered unclean spirits. Matthew 12:43 might allude to the belief that such mythical beings lived in the desert seeking rest, in the words Ὅταν δὲ τὸ ἀκάθαρτον πνεῦμα ἐξέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, διέρχεται διʼ ἀνύδρων τόπων ζητοῦν ἀνάπαυσιν καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκει. Once again, the language of Revelation 18:2 echoes some of the ideas of this verse, strengthening its association with 34:11. Q contains a marginal note with the readings of Aquila and Symmachus, which use Λιλιθ and Λάμιᾰ respectively in place of ὀνοκένταυροι.
15 Ottley suggested G read קפד instead of קפוז.
16 According to Eusebius, the deer (a clean animal) who were commanded are the apostles, commanded to make disciples of all nations.
17 The phrase διεμέρισεν βόσκεσθαι implies an object that must be made explicit in English, and his hand distributed food for them to be fed. The feminine gender of αὐτῆς refers to an implied γῆ, land that is inherited (κληρονομήσατε), or it could simply be feminine because the Hebrew pronoun is feminine here (בה).
Rejoice, deserted land!(35:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 35:1-2]]
1 The adjective ἔρημος is feminine (as is usual for the substantive use), agreeing with the feminine nominative participle of διψάω. My translation retains the adjective form and supplies “land,” representing the implied noun γῆ. Arie van der Kooij argued on the basis of 32:2 and 25:5, where Zion is associated with a “thirsty land,” that G “reflects the idea that the transformation of the desert as an image alludes to the restoration of Zion from being a desert to a place of life” (2010, 11). Van der Kooij pointed out that according the Eusebius, the desert in 35:1-2 is not the same “desert” as in chapter 34, where it was Jewish Jerusalem; but contra van der Kooij’s (unreferenced) assertion that here the desert alludes to Zion, Eusebius did not call the desert Zion or Jerusalem in 2.9, but rather it is the church of God (καὶ ἡ πάλαι δὲ ἔρημος καὶ ἄνυδρος καὶ ἄκαρπος, λέγω δὲ ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ). To arrive at τὰ ἔρημα τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, rather than claiming “this expression has no basis in the Hebrew text” (van der Kooij 2010, 13), it seems to me preferable to suppose (as Ottley did) that G derived גילת from גלה “lay bare” rather than גיל “exult” and read ירדן “Jordan” rather than ירק “and singing,” an explanation van der Kooij accepted as incomplete (2010, 19). I remain unconvinced that G considered the “desert” here to refer to Zion. Justin (Dial. 69) quoted 35:1-7 (with minor changes) as a prophecy that Gentiles would renounce idols and hope in Christ, as follows: Εὐφράνθητι ἔρημος ἡ διψῶσα, ἀγαλλιάσθω ἔρημος, καὶ ἐξανθείτω ὡς κρίνον. Καὶ ἐξανθήσει καὶ ἀγαλλιάσεται τὰ ἔρημα τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, καὶ ἡ δόξα τοῦ Λιβάνου ἐδόθη αὐτῇ, καὶ ἡ τιμὴ τοῦ Καρμήλου. Καὶ ὁ λαός μου ὄψεται τὸ ὕψος κυρίου, καὶ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἰσχύσατε χεῖρες ἀνειμέναι, καὶ γόνατα παραλελυμένα. Παρακαλεῖσθε οἱ ὀλιγόψυχοι τῇ καρδίᾳ, ἰσχύσατε, μὴ φοβεῖσθε. Ἰδοὺ ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν κρίσιν ἀνταποδίδωσι καὶ ἀνταποδώσει· αὐτὸς ἥξει καὶ σώσει ἡμᾶς. Τότε ἀνοιχθήσονται ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν, καὶ ὦτα κωφῶν ἀκούσονται· τότε ἁλεῖται ὡς ἔλαφος ὁ χωλὸς, καὶ τρανὴ ἔσται γλῶσσα μογιλάλων· ὅτι ἐῤῥάγη ἐν ἐρήμῳ ὕδωρ καὶ φάραγξ ἐν τῇ διψώσῃ, καὶ ἡ ἄνυδρος ἔσται εἰς ἕλη, καὶ εἰς διψῶσαν γῆν πηγὴ ὕδατος ἔσται. Tertullian (Marc. 4.8) saw in 35:1 a prophecy that Jesus’ temptation would be in the desert.
Our God will repay(35:3-7)[[@Bible:Isa 35:3-4]]
3 When the object of ἀνίημι is hands (as in Sirach 30:34; Isa 37:27; 2 Kings 24:16 || 1 Chron 21:15), typically the meaning is to relent; but Isa 25:11 and Jer 15:6 have the sense of spreading out one’s hand for destruction. Eusebius here based his interpretation on the parallel with feeble knees, and certainly the command Ἰσχύσατε fits this meaning. The sense is the opposite of clenched and ready for action. These hands are relaxed, at ease, forceless; hence “impotent.” Hebrews 12:12 clearly alludes to exhortation to strenghten slack hands and knees in the words τὰς παρειμένας χεῖρας καὶ τὰ παραλελυμένα γόνατα ἀνορθώσατε.
4 Verburg argued that G wrote κρίσιν ἀνταποδίδωσιν καὶ ἀνταποδώσει to enhance the theme of judgment, as elsewhere in Isaiah where ἀνταποδίδωμι appears in 35:8; 59:18; 66:6 (Verburg 2014). John’s Gospel alludes to Zechariah, which echoes Isaiah; John 12:15 reads μὴ φοβοῦ, θυγάτηρ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεται. Ignatius (Magn. 9) saw the phrase “he will come and save us” as a prophecy of Jesus. Irenaeus (Haer. 3.20) used the same expression to prove that we cannot save ourselves.
5 Many Christian authors (beginning with the Synoptic Gospels, and including Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Eusebius, Lactantius, Cyprian, Novatian, Tertullian, Hymenaeus, Irenaeus, Justin) used this prophecy to prove that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God.
6 The synoptic gospels allude to the blind seeing, lame walking, and deaf hearing. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke 7:22 has ὅτι τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται, just like Matthew, except for few conjunctions. Justin (Dial. 69; 12; 1 Apol. 48) saw 35:1-7 as a prophecy of Jesus’ appearing and healing by his word. So did Irenaeus (Haer. 4.33.11), Tertullian (Answer to Jews 9; Marc. 4.10, 12, 24; Resurrection of the Flesh 20), Cyprian (Test. 2.7), Novatian (Trin. 9; 12), Lactantius (Inst. 4.15). Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.18) interpreted the healings in both physical and spiritual ways.
7 For εὐφροσύνη G probably read בנוה as רנה. G guessed ὀρνέων as the meaning of תנים (probably “jackals”), for which G has no consistent translation.
The redeemed will return with eternal happiness(35:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 35:3-4]]
8 Verburg argued that G translated מסלול ודרך as ὁδός καθαρὰ to harmonize with סלל translated as “cleanse” in 57:14 (Verburg 2014). Revelation 21:27 alludes to the absence of unclean things, but with almost no lexical commonalities: καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος εἰ μὴ οἱ γεγραμμένοι ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου. Tertullian (Marc. 4.24) saw 35:8 as the way of faith to reach God. In Res. 58, he said the “everlasting joy” comes after the resurrection.
9 Perhaps G read רע (“evil”) instead of פריץ (“violent”). According to Eusebius, the “redeemed” are those mentioned by 1 Peter 1:19, redeemed by Jesus’ precious blood.
10 Although normally ὑπέρ with the genitive indicates a subject matter, with κεφαλῆς it commonly means above, as in Deut 28:23; 2 Esdras 9:6; Jonah 4:6. Verburg suggested that the translation καὶ συνηγμένοι διὰ κύριον was influenced either by the antonym διασπείρω (as in 56:8) or by the theme of eschatological gathering as found for example in Isa 60 (Verburg 2014). Rev 21:4 alludes to the disappearance of sorrow without using any of the same vocabulary: καὶ ἐξαλείψει πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, [ὅτι] τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν. Marchalianus has σωτηρία where S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Zielger) read εὐφροσύνη.
Assyria attacks Jerusalem(36:1)[[@Bible:Isa 36:1-2]]
1 Marshall Hurwitz argued that chapters 36-39 were translated by a different translator than the rest of Isaiah (Hurwitz 1957, 75–83), on the evidence that anthropomorphisms are reduced, and vocabulary equivalents are more consistent, than in the rest of Greek Isaiah. (See also Ashmore 1972; Catastini 1989; 1983b; 1983a). Konkel noted that both G and Kingdoms ἐπὶ τὰς πόλεις do not include an equivalent to Hebrew כל (Konkel 1993, 469).
An embassy meets Rapsakes(36:2-6)[[@Bible:Isa 36:3]]
3 The meaning of γραμματεύς is more than the “scribe” who was an expert in the law in the Gospels; it refers to a government-appointed recorder or clerk with authority in Exodus 5:6-19 and Acts 19:35. It appears in parallel with elders (Numbers 11:16) and is a military official in 1 Macc 5:42. Lust lists ὑπομνηματογράφος as a neologism but it is also reconstructed in a contemporary private letter (Witkowsky 1911, sec. 47). Muraoka said it is the “name of a great official in the Egyptian king’s household, and the corresponding official in the office of the minister of finance, and prob. in those of other high officials.”
4 This introductory formula τάδε λέγει expresses authority. In the scriptures it usually introduces divine words, but here the source of the words is ὁ βασιλεύς. This is not unprecedented. The first instance of the phrase actually has Joseph as the speaker (Genesis 45:9). A royal speaker (Pharaoh) also appears in Exodus 5:10. Others’ words introduced using this formula include Israel (Numbers 20:14) and Balak (Numbers 22:16). The interrogative pronoun Τί πεποιθὼς εἶ; asks about not the object of (which would use the dative Τινι or the prepositions ἐπί τινι, ἔν τινι, or εἴς τινα) but the reason for the confidence.
5 The negative μή indicates a rhetorical question expecting a negative answer (Porter 1992, sec. 18.2.1).
6 The subject of εἰσελεύσεται could be referent of ὃς ἂν ἐπʼ αὐτὴν ἐπιστηρισθῇ, or (if that relative pronoun is resumed by αὐτοῦ), the subject of εἰσελεύσεται could be the referent of αὐτήν in that same phrase, i.e., the direct object of that phrase. In the first case the meaning would be “Whoever leans on it, he will penetrate into his own hand.” In the second case it would be a Nominativus Pendens, “as for he who leans on it, it will penetrate his hand.” Certainly the latter interpretation fits the context better.
Rapsakes denigrates Lord and claims his commission(36:7-11)[[@Bible:Isa 36:7-9]]
7 Arie van der Kooij argued that G wished to avoid contradicting the centralization law in Deuteronomy 12 (van der Kooij 2006b). Matt 27:43 echoes Isa 36:7’s claim of trusting God: πέποιθεν ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, ῥυσάσθω νῦν εἰ θέλει αὐτόν.
8 On the spelling of μίχθητε, see BDAG μίγνυμι/μιγνύω, which refers to BDF §23. Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it μείχθητε. In the New Testament, this verb is commonly used for mixing liquids, and by extension, mixing people. But the broader meaning of the verb is to bring things in contact with each other (in a neutral sense), and often in a hostile sense of an encounter in battle. The article is used in τῷ κυρίῳ, which does not refer to God.
10 The question with μή expects a negative answer (Porter 1992, secs. 18, 2.1). It wasn’t without (ἄνευ) Lord, implying that Lord commissioned Rapsakes to attack. The words Κύριος εἶπεν πρὸς με Ἀνάβηθι καὶ κατάφθειρον τὴν γῆν ταύτην are marked with marginal asterisks in Sinaiticus; these words are absent in the first-hand of Marchalianus, in Alexandrinus, and in the editions of Rahlfs and Ziegler; Vaticanus has Κύριος εἶπεν πρὸς μέ Ἀνάβηθι ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ταύτην καὶ διάφθειρον αὐτήν; the marginal note in Q records the reading of the Three, which is identical to that of B (except for the lack of a final nu on εἶπεν in Q’s margin).
11 The pronoun ἡμεῖς is redundant with ἀκούομεν, and is therefore emphatic. The emphasis does not come through in the translation “we understand it,” yet
“we ourselves understand it” would be an awkward overtranslation. The conjunction ἵνα does not introduce the clause that has λαλεῖς as its verb. If it were, we would expect to find a subjunctive form instead of the indicative λαλεῖς. Rather ἵνα τί is the question “why?” BDAG describes this usage under ἱνατί. It is common in LXX and appears also in 1 Cor 10:29; Matt 9:4; 27:46; Luke 13:7; Acts 4:25; 7:26. On the basis of 36:7, Justin Martyr attributed Psalm 110 to Hezekiah (Dial. 83). Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 5.14) found here evidence that the Lord is the God of all.
Rapsakes refuses to speak Aramaic(36:12)[[@Bible:Isa 36:12]]
12 Twice we see κύριος with the article, when not referring to God. The first-hand of Q wrote the noun αἷμα; the iota was subsequently deleted to match the adverb ἅμα of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Neither Ziegler’s nor Swete’s apparatus lists Q’s first-hand reading.
Rapsakes addresses the people in Hebrew(36:13-16)[[@Bible:Isa 36:13-16]]
13 The language spoken is here called “Judean.” In Josephus’ telling, the language is “Hebrew” (ἑβραϊστί, Ant. 10.8). The psychological effect would be greater if the people were also pressuring their king to surrender.
14 Rapsakes attempts to dissolve the relationship of trust between the people and their king. Instead of ἀπατάτω, the parallel in 4 Kingdoms 18:29 has ἐπαιρέτω.
15 Josephus summarized this part of the speech as δῆλον γὰρ ὡς τὸν λαὸν ὑμεῖς τε καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἐλπίσι παρακρουόμενοι ματαίαις ἀντέχειν πείθετε (Ant. 10.9).
Rapsakes calls the people to surrender(36:16-17)[[@Bible:Isa 36:16-17]]
17 In Josephus’ telling, Rapsakes omits the promise of a fertile land (Ant. 10.10).
Rapsakes points to past victories(36:18-20)[[@Bible:Isa 36:18-21]]
18 The earlier manuscript Rahlfs 902 supports the word order of Q, S, and A (ὑμᾶς ἀπατάτω) against B, and the word order of the original scribe of S (ὑμᾶς ῥύσεται) against Q, A, and B. The verb ῥύομαι has appeared only three times in Isaiah before chapter 36, where it appears seven times, and once again in 37:12. Thereafter it appears in chapters 44; 47-52; 54; 59; 63, but in those later instances it usually translates גאל. In this chapter it refers to the military protection a god provides. The plural subject ἐρρύσαντο οἱ θεοὶ shifts to the singular by means of the distributive pronoun ἕκαστος, so that τὴν ἑαυτοῦ is now singular.
19 The reader unfamiliar with the names Semar, Arphath, and Epphareni would assume these are cities in Samaria. In Eusebius’s text, the spellings are Αἰμὰθ, Ἀρφάδ, and Ἐπφαρουέμ. There is no city named Amar, but the Hebrew Hamath is on the Orontes in Syria; Arpad is in northern Syria; Sepharvaim is on the Euphrates. Eusebius explained that the reason Samaria was destroyed is given here: they had turned to many gods, disbobeying their ancestral laws (2.10).
20 Matt 27:43 echoes the disparaging mockery that casts doubt on God’s willingness to save, in the words πέποιθεν ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, ῥυσάσθω νῦν εἰ θέλει αὐτόν.
No one answers Rapsakes(36:21)[[@Bible:Isa 36:22]]
21 Eusebius affirmed that silence is the appropriate response to blasphemers in times of persecution or public debates (2.10).
The embassy reports back to Hezekiah(36:22)[[@Bible:Isa 36:22]]
22 The plural τοὺς χιτῶνας probably refers not to a specific type of clothing (tunic, shirt), but to clothes generally, as also in Mark 14:63. However, in Mark, the verb is not σχίζω but διαρήσσω.
Hezekiah reacts to the embassy’s report(37:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 37:1-2]]
1 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah substituted sackcloth for his royal clothing to signify his misery and distress, and because of this humilty, God responded with compassion and mercy (2.11).
2 The verb ἀπέστειλεν is singular, with Hezekiah still as its subject. The people he sends are described with the plural participle περιβεβλημένους σάκκους, which is the phrase picked up by Revelation 11:3, Καὶ δώσω τοῖς δυσὶν μάρτυσίν μου καὶ προφητεύσουσιν ἡμέρας χιλίας διακοσίας ἑξήκοντα περιβεβλημένοι σάκκους.
3 The earlier manuscript 902 does not include ἡ before σήμερον. According to Eusebius, Hezekiah referred to himself only by name, not by title “the king” because the humble occasion did not permit it (οὐ γὰρ ὁ καιρὸς αὐτῷ τοῦτ’ ἐπέτρεπε λέγειν ταπεινουμένῳ τῆς παρούσης ἕνεκα συμφορᾶς, 2.11).
4 The phrase καὶ δεηθήσῃ πρὸς Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου is absent in A, and corrector cb2 also deleted it from S, indicating a very close relationship between A and Scb2, since the omission in A is likely due to parablepsis involving σου. Corrector cb3 later reinstated the phrase. Rahlfs and Ziegler spell καταλελιμμένων as καταλελειμμένων. The verb δέομαι (which forms its future as δεηθήσομαι and refers to requesting) is not to be confused with δέω (which forms its aorist passive as δεθῆναι and refers to binding). The vowel cluster εη in δεηθήσῃ does not contract because the root was originally *δεϝ, as evidenced by the Homeric form δεύομαι. Justin Martyr (Dial. 83) appeals to this verse in his argument that Psalm 110 should be applied not to Hezekiah but to Christ.
Isaiah replies; Rapsakes sends another warning(37:5-13)[[@Bible:Isa 37:5-7]]
5 Since the servants of the king are reported to have come to Isaiah but not to have said anything, Eusebius inferred that Isaiah anticipated their words (2.11). The original scribe of Marchalianus mistakenly wrote τοῦ βασιλέως τοῦ βασιλέως, before catching the error and deleting the redundant words.
6 Here τὸν κύριον does not refer to God, and therefore has an article.
7 Where our manuscript and Alexandrinus (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read the future form ἐμβαλῶ, S (ἐνβάλλω) and B (ἐμβάλλω ) have the present form. The translation “when he hears a message he will return” indicates not simultaneous action (which would be “while he hears a message”) but consequent action, reflecting the perfective semantics of the Greek aorist.
8 In place of Λομνά (which is the reading Ziegler adopted), B has Λόβναν, A has Λόβνα, and S (Rahlfs) has Λόμναν; according to Q’s margins, the Three have Λαβανά. The subject of κατέλαβεν πολιορκοῦντα τὸν βασιλέα Λομνά is Rapsakes, and the object is τὸν βασιλέα, modified by πολιορκοῦντα, which has Λομνά as its object. In other words, Rapsakes left Jerusalem and rejoined the Assyrian king while the king was beseiging Lomna.
9 G moved Θαράθα βασιλεὺς Αἰθιόπων into the subordinate clause. The Hebrew says “he heard concerning Tirhakah the king of Cush, saying, ‘He has set out to fight against you.’” His consequent departure means any communication to Jerusalem must now be in writing.
11 The use of the particle ὡς here is described in BDAG ①ⓑδ. The phrase ἐξηγοῦντο ὡς in Luke 24:35 corresponds to English “they told how;” similarly, Luke 8:47 ἀπήγγειλεν ὡς, where the woman told them “that” she was healed, and Luke 25:53 ἐθεάσαντο ὡς, where the women saw “how” his body was placed.
12 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding the proper name that in our manuscript is spelled Θαιμάν. Ottley noted, “The following proper name, Θαιμὰδ A, Θεεμὰθ B, Θαιμὰν Q, may have been conjecturally altered: but the LXX. spelling of unfamiliar proper names is so erratic, that no inference can, as a rule, be drawn from it” (1904, 1:2:288).
13 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding Ἀμάρ and Ἀρφάδ.
Hezekiah prays for salvation(37:14-20)[[@Bible:Isa 37:14-20]]
15 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah confidently trusted in the prophet’s sacred promises and sent up the following theologically rich prayer.
16 Acts 4:24 echoes Hezekiah’s address, with the words δέσποτα, σὺ ὁ ποιήσας τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς. It is clear that the indeclinable noun χερουβείμ is genitive because of the preceding τῶν.
17 G refrained from the anthropomorphisms involving God’s “ear” and “eyes;” The Hebrew says, “Yahweh, extend your ear and hear! Yahweh, open your eyes and see!”
18 The prepositional phrase ἐπʼ ἀληθείας appears also in the New Testament, modifying the expressions “you teach the way of God” (Matt 12:14; Luke 20:21) “you have said” (Mark 12:32); “I tell you” (Luke 4:25); “this man was with him” (Luke 22:59); also Acts 4:27; 10:34. It usually appears near the beginning of a sentence and corresponds to “in truth” or “truly.”
19 The plural form ξύλα is typically used when wood is the substance, the building material. Galatians 4:8 echoes the image of not being gods: Ἀλλὰ τότε μὲν οὐκ εἰδότες θεὸν ἐδουλεύσατε τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσιν θεοῖς.
20 The expression θεὸς μόνος is used by Novatian (Trinity 30). This phrase is rare in the LXX, appearing in 4 Kgdms 19:15;
Ps 85:10b; Isa 37:16, 20; 2 Macc 7:37; 4 Macc 5:24. John 5:44 uses it in the question τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ οὐ ζητεῖτε;.
Isaiah confirms Hezekiah’s prayer(37:21-24)[[@Bible:Isa 37:21]]
21 G read the ambiguous וישלח as a passive rather than the active (as it is pointed in the MT). G added ἤκουσα, which does appear in 4 Kingdoms 19:20, however there it is at the end of the verse, where it is also in the Hebrew of 2 Kings 19:20.
22 The phrase περὶ αὐτοῦ indicates the topic of the prophecy is Sennachereim; he is the addressee. Because θυγάτηρ is not vocative but nominative, the virgin daughter Zion and daughter Jerusalem are the subject rather than the addressee of the verb. Eusebius confirms this with his interpretation, ἡ δὲ θαρσοῦσα τῇ ἑαυτῆς καθαρότητι καὶ τῷ ἑαυτῆς βοηθῷ θεῷ τὸν ὑπερήφανόν σου λογισμὸν καὶ τὰς ἀπειλὰς ἐκείνας ἐξεφαύλισε καὶ ἐμυκτήρισεν ὡς οὐδενὸς ἀξίας (2.13). The phrase ἐπὶ σοὶ κεφαλὴν ἐκίνησεν has a parallel in Mark 15:29||Matt 27:39 and Sirach 12:18; 13:7 (τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ κινήσει ἐπὶ σοί). It is an act of derision; BDAG says this usage appears in Homer. Jerusalem is thumbing her nose at Sennachereim.
23 The rhetorical questions refer to the arrogance the Assyrians showed to the Judeans.
Sennachereim’s boast(37:24-25)[[@Bible:Isa 37:21]]
24 The Holy One of Israel accuses the Assyrians of boasting of their military accomplishments.
25 Michael van der Meer demonstrated that γέφυρα refers to not a dam but a bridge. He argued that G had in mind the specific bridge over the Euphrates in Babylon. G read קור as קרה and מצור as from צור (van der Meer 2008a, 233–34). Eusebius preferred to expound the version of Symmachus, “I dug and I drank water and laid waste, stopping up all rivers with my footprint,” and claimed that these words recall the rivers obliterated by Assyria, and symbolize the many nations who thought they had their gods’ support (2.13).
God has brought down mighty nations(37:26-27)[[@Bible:Isa 37:26-27]]
26 According to Eusebius, God takes the credit for the Assyrians’ victories by withdrawing his protection from the cities he had formerly defended because of their profane behaviour (2.13).
27 Eusebius explained that the comparison is with grass which does not bear fruit because the people did not bear the good fruit of godliness (2.13).
The survivors will be from Jerusalem(37:28-29)[[@Bible:Isa 37:28-32]]
28 The “going out and coming in” refer, in Eusebius’ interpretation, to the Assyrian king’s reasonings (2.13).
29 Theodoret alluded to the hook and bit of 27:29 in describing the death of Cyril (Ep. 180).
Sennachereim will turn back the way he came(37:30-35)[[@Bible:Isa 37:21]]
31 Gregory Nazianzen alluded to the seed and root of 37:31, in Orat. 21.24.
32 According to Eusebius, those left in Jerusalem will be saved (διασωθήσονται οἱ ἐπὶ τῆς Ἰερουσαλὴμ καταλειφθέντες) if they bear fruit (2.13).
33 A fourfold image emphatically asserts the Assyrians’ failure to enter, shoot, and beseige Jerusalem. The Shepherd of Hermas uses χάραξ to denote a fence (Similitudes V, iv, 1 and V, v, 5).
34 Lord asserts that the Assyrians will instead go back home.
35 Eusebius claimed that no one else would prevail against the city either, because of God’s protection (2.13), and for David’s sake, so that people will imitate his love of God.
Lord’s angel kills the Assyrian army(37:36-38)[[@Bible:Isa 37:36]]
36 G used the third person plural εὗρον for והנה, but in Hebrew the discoverer of the deaths is left unspecified; likewise Eusebius used the passive form of the verb, thereby obsuring the identity of the discoverers (2.13).
37 Eusebius made no comment on Sennachereim’s death. Instead of καὶ ἀποστραφείς ἀπῆλθεν, 4 Kingdoms 19:36 has καὶ ἀπῆρεν καὶ ἐπορεύθη καὶ ἀπέστρεψεν.
38 According to Hatch and Redpath, πάτραρχον is a corruption of the loanword πάταχρος from Aramaic פְּתַכְרָא. Ziegler said the Aramaic spelling פַכְתָרָא indicates πάταχρα is the correct spelling in Isa 8:21 and πάταχρον in Isa 37:38 (1939, 81). This Aramaic word is used in Targums of Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5; and Isaiah 8:21.
Hezekiah becomes sick and prays(38:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 38:1]]
1 Eusebius connected God’s power over life and death as expressed in the preceding story with his power over life and death in Hezekiah’s illness, quoting Deut 32:39 (I kill and give life). Instead of ἐμαλακίσθη Ἑζεκίας ἕως θανάτου and Τάξαι περὶ τοῦ οἴκου σου, 4 Kingdoms has ἠρρώστησεν εἰς θάνατον and Ἔντειλαι τῷ οἴκῳ.
2 According to Eusebius, the reason this story is recorded is to show that God is in control of fate (ἀνάγκη), all existence, and nature (2.14). It shows that although it might seem to humans that one’s end is near, God is the one who determines one’s time of death.
3 The expression ἐν καρδίᾳ ἀληθινῇ conveys the way Hezekiah lived, as Eusebius explained: ἀγαθῇ συνειδήσει τοῦ μετὰ ἀληθείας καὶ ἐν καρδίᾳ ἀληθινῇ εὐαρέστως αὐτῷ βεβιωκέναι (2.14). Hebrews 10:22 echoes the image of the true heart in the words προσερχώμεθα μετὰ ἀληθινῆς καρδίας. The papyrus in the national library at Vienna numbered G 2320 includes text from Isaiah 38:3-5 (Wessely 1909). This manuscript dates from the third century CE, and Rahlfs gave it the siglum 948 (Rahlfs and Fraenkel 2004, 393–94).
Isaiah delivers Lord’s answer(38:4-8)[[@Bible:Isa 38:4-9]]
4 4 Kingdoms 20:4 has καὶ ἦν Ησαιας ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ τῇ μέσῃ, καὶ ῥῆμα κυρίου ἐγένετο πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγων.
5 4 Kingdoms 20:5-6 has Ἐπίστρεψον καὶ ἐρεῖς πρὸς Εζεκιαν τὸν ἡγούμενον τοῦ λαοῦ μου Τάδε λέγει κύριος ὁ θεὸς Δαυιδ τοῦ πατρός σου Ἤκουσα τῆς προσευχῆς σου, εἶδον τὰ δάκρυά σου, ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἰάσομαί σε, τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ ἀναβήσῃ εἰς οἶκον κυρίου, καὶ προσθήσω ἐπὶ τὰς ἡμέρας σου πέντε καὶ δέκα ἔτη.
6 4 Kingdoms 20:6 has καὶ ἐκ χειρὸς βασιλέως Ἀσσυρίων σώσω σε καὶ τὴν πόλιν ταύτην καὶ ὑπερασπιῶ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως ταύτης διʼ ἐμὲ καὶ διὰ Δαυιδ τὸν δοῦλόν μου.
7 Luke 2:12 echoes the formula for a miraculous sign, in the announcement of Jesus’ birth to the shepherds, καὶ τοῦτο ὑμῖν τὸ σημεῖον, εὑρήσετε βρέφος ἐσπαργανωμένον καὶ κείμενον ἐν φάτνῃ.
8 Codex Vaticanus moves ὁ ἥλιος from before τοὺς to after σου. Hippolytus, Isaiah, refers to this instance of the sun stopping, along with that of Joshua. Gregory Nazianzen Oration 18 mentions the miracle of Hezekiah’s extended life, signified by the shadow turning back.
Prayer of Hezekiah(38:9-20)[[@Bible:Isa 38:10-20]])
10 Eusebius called this not a prayer but a “word of gratitude” (λόγον εὐχαριστήριον, 2.14). It does not appear in 4 Kingdoms. As Ottley noted, καταλείψω is an unusual translation of פקד.
11 Eusebius added, “And while I reflected on these things, I said to myself: may I never be found unworthy of life with God after death and of the portion of the living who abide with him and thereafter the salvation of God.” In his view, Hezekiah wanted to make sure that after death he would see a man of God and rest with the blessed souls. Eusebius claimed that Hezekiah had no child at this point, so was distressed at the end of the line of succession (2.14).
12 The noun πνεῦμα could refer to breath or spirit. In either case the image is of one’s life departing. The prepositional phrase παρʼ ἐμοί conveys location: with or beside. The verb ἐγένετο normally indicates not just being but becoming. The noun ἱστός could be anything standing upright, so prototypically a pole. But one technical meaning is the beam of a loom. In connection with ἐρίθου, that is the preferred meaning, because while ἔριθος prototypically means servant, in this case the genitive participle ἐγγιζούσης indicates that the genitive noun ἐρίθου is also feminine, indicating a spinster.
13 Swete and Ziegler place ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ παρεδόθην in verse 13 with what follows; Rahlfs put them in verse 12.
14 The verb μελετάω according to the lexicons typically means to take care, to practice, cultivate. In Isaiah, however, it almost always is audible. In Isa 16:7 it is absolute, in parallel with ὀλολύζω; in 59:3 lips do it, in parallel with λαλέω; in 59:13 it is in parallel with λαλέω and κύω (impregnate/conceive). In 27:8 ὁ μελετῶν τῷ πνεύματι refers to scheming. In 33:18 it has an accusative object: one’s soul μελετήσει φόβον. Within this semantic range, the only action that a dove might perform is audible. Eusebius confirms that constant moaning or muttering is meant, when he elaborates, ὡς περιστερὰ ἐμελέτων ἀποκλαόμενος, εὐχομένου δέ μού φησιν ἐπιμόνως καὶ ἐγκειμένου τῇ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἱκετηρίᾳ (2.14).
15 Rahlfs began verse 15 with καὶ ἀφείλατό μου. Swete and Ziegler put these words in verse 14. Ziegler put τὴν ὀδύνην τῆς ψυχῆς in verse 15; Swete kept these words in verse 14, with no verse 15. The noun ὀδύνη normally refers to pain, whether of body or mind. Eusebius interpreted this phrase in light of Psalm 56:13, τὴν ψυχήν μου ἐρρύσατο ἐκ θανάτου, implying that the “pain” of the soul is the death of the soul.
16 For ἀνηγγέλη and καὶ ἐξήγειράς G read one Hebrew word (יחיו, “they live”) two ways: both as יחוו, “they declared” and as וחיתני, “you enlivened me,” and for σοι לך instead of ולכל. G did nothing with “among them” (בהמה in 1QIsaa).
17 Swete spelled ἀπέρριψας as ἀπέριψας. The form εἵλου is the second person singular of the aorist middle indicative (the first person is εἱλόμην) of αἱρέω, which in the middle refers to choosing.
18 According to Eusebius, the reason those in Hades will not praise God is not because this is the place of the dead but because this is the place of the ungodly (2.14).
19 Athanasius alluded to the inability of the dead to praise God in Ep. fest. 7.3. Origen quoted 38:19 as an example of miraculous begetting in one’s old age, in Cels. 8.46. Jerome used 38:19 to show Hezekiah was married (Jov. 1.5).
20 Athanasius quoted 38:20 in Ep. fest. 10.3 (see also Chrysostom, Hom. Rom. 18). He referred to the word for “make” to demonstrate that begetting can be called making (C. Ar. 2.4).
Isaiah tells Hezekiah the cure(38:21-22)[[@Bible:Isa 38:21-22]]
21 Methodius quoted 38:21, calling the fig the fruit of the Holy Spirit (Discourse 10.5).
22 According to Eusebius, Hezekiah did not want the cake to be a sign of healing, so he said the sign would be him going up to the house of God. For Hezekiah, the wound was of no consequence in comparison with going up to God’s house (2.14).
Hezekiah shows the embassy the storehouses(39:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 39:1]]
1 The agreement between chapter 39 and 4 Kingdoms 20:12-19 is a bit greater than half of the words. The phrase Ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ is a literal translation of בעת ההיא (as 1QIsaa spells it). G used this phrase previously in 38:1 where the Hebrew is בימים ההם, and in 18:7 where the Hebrew is בעת ההיא. The Hebrew בעת ההיא appears also in 20:2 but there it is translated as τότε. For Μαιωδάχ, 4 Kgdms 20:12 has Μαρωδαχβαλαδαν. The nominative υἱός, in apposition to Μαιωδάχ, indicates that this is the subject. For Λααδάν B and 4 Kgdms 20:12 have Βαλαδάν. The article indicates this is a genitive, so the βασιλεύς refers to Μαιωδάχ, not Λααδάν. Βαβυλωνίας is used only in Isa 11:11; 14:23; 39:7; three times in 1 Esdras (4:53; 6:16; 8:13); and 2 Macc 8:20; 3 Macc 6:6. The mascuiline form appears in 2 Esdr 4.9; Ep. Jer 1; Bel 3, 23, 28. The plural ἐπιστολάς indicates that multiple letters were sent. The name Ἑζεκία is absent in B; 4 Kgdms has πρὸς Εζεκιαν. The verb ἀνέστη is not the expected translation of חזק. Typically ἀνίστημι is used for resurrection from death, but only rarely for recovery from illness (LSJ lists only Herodotus Hist. 1.22.4 and Thucydides Hist. 2.49.8). The explanation for this translation is not likely because the Greek translator thought Hezekiah had actually died. Eusebius did not take it that way; he called the recovery simply ἐκ τῆς νόσου σωτηρίαν (2.15).
2 The referent of αὐτοῖς is the πρέσβεις. The adverbial accusative χαρὰν μεγάλην is absent in B; it is included in 4 Kgdms. Matt 2:10 uses a similar phrase, ἰδόντες δὲ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐχάρησαν χαρὰν μεγάλην σφόδρα. After νεχωθά B also includes καὶ τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου (see below), with 4 Kgdms, which also includes τὰ ἀρώματα καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον τὸ ἀγαθόν, καὶ τὸν οἶκον. In both this case and in 4 Kdgms 20:13 the Hebrew נכתה is transliterated. LEH refers to P. N. Simotas, Αἱ ἀμετάφραστοι λέξεις ἐν τῷ κειμένῳ τῶν O’, Τhessaloniki, 1968. HALOT traces the Hebrew בֵּית נְכֹתֹה “treasure-house” to Akkadian bīt nakāmti.
The noun θυμίαμα is used commonly in the plural for incense. After μύρου B lacks καὶ τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου, but has them earlier. There is no corresponding word in Hebrew translated as γάζης. Γάζα refers to the royal treasury, as in Acts 8:27.
Isaiah asks Hezekiah about the embassy(39:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 39:3-4]]
3 In this instance of τί and the next, the question is “what” rather than “why.” The present tense λέγουσιν is unexpected because it translates אָמְרוּ, a qatal form. The perfect form ἥκασιν is used, even though ἥκω inherently has a perfect sense already. Normally in the LXX (almost ten times as often) בא is translated by ἔρχομαι, but ἥκω is the next most common rendering. However, in Isaiah, ἔρχομαι (32 times), and ἥκω (30 times) are used with roughly equal frequency. Note that in both the 4 Kgdms version and here the same unusual rendering is chosen, even though 4 Kgdms strongly prefers ἔρχομαι or παραγίνομαι, indicating the translation of Isaiah influenced that of Kingdoms.
4 The form εἴδοσαν is from εἶδον, not οἶδα. The phrase ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ does not have a counterpart in the Hebrew.
Isaiah delivers the word of Lord(39:5-7)[[@Bible:Isa 39:5-8]]
6 Instead of simply ἔρχονται (the reading also of S, B, and 4 Kgdms), A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) has ἔρχονται, λέγει κύριος. The subject of λήμψονται is unspecified, but in context it must be the Babylonians. The object of ἥξει is ὅσα συνήγαγον. The form καταλίπωσιν is from καταλείπω, “leave behind.”
7 The aorist reading ἐγέννησας is also in S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has the future γεννήσεις, with 4 Kgdms, reflecting the Hebrew yiqtol form תּוֹלִיד. The noun σπάδων refers to one who is castrated (LSJ). 4 Kgdms has εὐνοῦχος instead.
Hezekiah’s response(39:8)[[@Bible:Isa 39:5-8]]
8 Instead of the middle γενέσθω (the reading also of A and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the passive γενηθήτω; 4 Kgdms has ἔστω. Justin, Dial. 50.3 said 39:8 refers “to the office of forerunner discharged by John the Baptist and prophet before this our Lord Jesus Christ.” The text of Justin matches that of Q and A (lacking only the particle δὴ): Καὶ εἶπεν Ἐζεκίας πρὸς Ἠσαΐαν, Ἀγαθὸς ὁ λόγος κυρίου, ὃν ἐλάλησε· Γενέσθω εἰρήνη καὶ δικαιοσύνη ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις μου.
Comfort Jerusalem!(40:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 40:1-2]]
Justin Martyr saw no break between chapters 39 and 40, quoting 39:8 and 40:1-17 as if Hezekiah spoke it all (Dial. 50). He claimed Isaiah foretold John. Eusebius noticed the various parts of the book of Isaiah, yet maintained that one prophet was responsible for the whole. In his Comm. Isa. 1.4 he wrote, “The reader should notice that the book as a whole appears to have been joined together into a unity, and [that the message] was delivered by the prophet in parts over the duration of several lengthy intervals of time, so that [the book appears] to offer little precise information about the [events that] are to arise. [Isaiah wrote in this fashion in order that] the interpretation of the [prophecies] recorded therein [could be] determined after a while and [so that] the prophecy [would also be] applicable to the events that occurred during each kingdom.” The text of chapter 40 is relatively free of variants among the uncials. Many verses exhibit no differences.
1 Outside of the Bible παρακαλέω usually refers to persuasion, but as Bieringer noted, in addition to translating נחם as παρακαλέω 15 times where it means “comfort,” G introduced παρακαλέω 12 times with the meaning “comfort,” thereby making even more prevalent a theological point that is already present in Isaiah (Bieringer 2008). Luke 2:25 alludes to the comforting of Israel with the following description of Simeon: ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ εὐλαβὴς προσδεχόμενος παράκλησιν τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, καὶ πνεῦμα ἦν ἅγιον ἐπʼ αὐτόν.
2 The plural form ἱερεῖς is the vocative of ἱερεύς. The Hebrew does not specify the addressees, so as Ziegler noted (1934, 71) the Greek makes the command to apprise the people of the restoration into a command to priests. Kim found in this transformation evidence that G worked in a priest-centred community, namely the Temple of Onias (2009, 198). The phrase λαλήσατε εἰς τὴν καρδίαν is a literal translation of דברו על לב. The verb πίμπλημι (ἐπλήσθη) is not usually used for completion of time, except in the first two chapters of Luke’s gospel (1:23, 57; 2:6, 21, 22), but this usage is attested in inscriptions (see LSJ πίμπλημι I.4). So is the usage of complete a prescribed experience (LSJ πίμπλημι I.5), which is what we see here. G untypically uses λέλυται for רצה “redeem,” which is most commonly translated as προσδέξασθαι. The sense is that the obligation has been released and discharged. Ottley pointed to Aristophanes Frogs 691 λῦσαι τὰς πρότερον ἁμαρτίας. Revelation 1:5 alludes to the release from sins in the words, Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ. For the singular עונה G has the singular ἁμαρτία, but for חטאתיה, which is still singular, he has the plural ἁμαρτήματα. Elsewhere in the Old Greek, the Hebrew עָוֺן would more commonly become ἀδικία or ἀνομία, but G prefers ἁμαρτία. The standard translation for חַטָּאת is ἁμαρτία as well, but because G already used that for עָוֺן he chose a different form of the same root. The neuter plural accusative adjective διπλᾶ is used in an adverbial sense, “doubly.” Muraoka (GELS, s.v. δέχομαι) glossed this phrase as receiving ‘the double portion of the penalty for her sins at the hands of the Lord.’ Revelation 18:6 alludes to the double punishment: ἀπόδοτε αὐτῇ ὡς καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπέδωκεν καὶ διπλώσατε τὰ διπλᾶ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῆς, ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ ᾧ ἐκέρασεν κεράσατε αὐτῇ διπλοῦν. Origen (Comm. Matt. 13.30) said God punishes more than is deserved. Hermas Vis. 1.3-4 uses this text to claim all barriers to God’s promises will be removed.
Prepare Lord’s way!(40:3-5)[[@Bible:Isa 40:3-5]]
3 The mismatched genders in φωνὴ βοῶντος make it impossible for the participle to modify the noun as it might in Hebrew, where קול קורא is masculine, and the state of קול is ambiguous: either in the construct state (yielding a genitive construction, as in G) or in the absolute state “a voice calling.” Mark 1:3 quotes the scriptures explicitly only in one verse, at Mark 1:3: φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ. Matt 3:3 and Luke 3:4 are identical. John 1:23 has φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ· Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου. Menken concluded that John quoted from the LXX, and changed Ἑτοιμάσατε to Εὐθύνατε under influence from the next line of Isa 40:3, and that
the change was motivated by a desire to make John not a predecessor but a contemporary witness to Jesus (Menken 1985). Barnabas 9.3 has Ἀκούσατε, τέκνα, φωνῆς βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. Justin Martyr (Dial. 50) claimed Isaiah foretold John. Origen argued that Isaiah says John is “an angel who assumed a body for the sake of bearing witness to the light” (Comm. Jo. 2.25). Victorinus connected the image of Mark as a lion with this “voice of one calling in the wilderness” (Comm. Rev. 4:7-10). Cyprian quoted 40:3-5 to show that Christ is God (Test. 2.6).
4 In G φάραγξ is the opposite of a mountain or hill; i.e., a valley. But in broader literature the usual meaning for φάραγξ is something smaller and steeper, something from which escape is difficult; something in which things can be thrown, something that can be filled, i.e., a chasm or ravine. φάραγξ is the most common rendering of the Hebrew גיא (also in 22:1, 5; Zec 14:5; Jer 7:32). The pair πληρωθήσεται … ταπεινωθήσεται recalls ἐπλήσθη ἡ ταπείνωσις from 40:2. The adjective σκολιός literally means crooked, and carries a figurative meaning similar to “crooked” in English. Note the difference between ὁδοὺς λείας (the reading also of A and S corrector ca, followed by Ziegler) and πεδία (Q’s margin, S*, B, followed by Rahlfs). Aquila and Symmachus have πεδία, the normal translation of בקעה. ὁδοὺς λείας is inexplicable unless it is the original reading. Luke 3:5-6 continues the quotation, πᾶσα φάραγξ πληρωθήσεται καὶ πᾶν ὄρος καὶ βουνὸς ταπεινωθήσεται, καὶ ἔσται τὰ σκολιὰ εἰς εὐθείαν καὶ αἱ τραχεῖαι εἰς ὁδοὺς λείας· καὶ ὄψεται πᾶσα σὰρξ τὸ σωτήριον τοῦ θεοῦ. Pss. Sol. 11:4 speaks of flattening mountains into level ground: ὄρη ὑψηλὰ ἐταπείνωσεν εἰς ὁμαλισμὸν αὐτοῖς, οἱ βουνοὶ ἐφύγοσαν ἀπὸ εἰσόδου αὐτῶν and 8:17 ὡμάλισαν ὁδοὺς τραχείας ἀπὸ εἰσόδου αὐτοῦ. Sib. Or. 3.680 likewise has ἠλιβάτους κορυφάς τʼ ὀρέων βουνούς τε πελώρων ῥήξει. Asssumption of Moses 10.4 speaks of high mountains brought low. Baruch 5:7 alludes to the leveling: συνέταξεν γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ταπεινοῦσθαι πᾶν ὄρος ὑψηλὸν καὶ θῖνας ἀενάους καὶ φάραγγας πληροῦσθαι εἰς ὁμαλισμὸν τῆς γῆς, ἵνα βαδίσῃ Ισραηλ ἀσφαλῶς τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ δόξῃ. The apocryphal Later Apocalypse of John 1 quotes 40:4 as referring to the cleansing of the earth at the eschaton.
5 The idiom πᾶσα σὰρξ is a literal translation of כול בשר. Simeon’s prayer alludes to seeing God’s salvation in Luke 2:30: ὅτι εἶδον οἱ ὀφθαλμοί μου τὸ σωτήριόν σου. Acts 28:28 uses an identical phrase to allude to the salvation of God for all people: γνωστὸν οὖν ἔστω ὑμῖν ὅτι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπεστάλη τοῦτο τὸ σωτήριον τοῦ θεοῦ· αὐτοὶ καὶ ἀκούσονται. Theodoret said Isaiah foretells “all flesh shall see the salvation of God.” (Eranistes 2).
All flesh withers like grass(40:6-8)[[@Bible:Isa 40:6-8]]
6 The phrase Φωνὴ λέγοντος recalls the Φωνὴ βοῶντος from 40:3. The first person form εἶπα is unexpected; it reflects the first person singular אקרא. Previously, the priests were addressed; here the imperative is singular. The speaker is assumed to be the prophet. The extent of the prophet’s speech beginning with Τί βοήσω is not specified. The third person reference to God indicates that the speech continues to the end of verse 8; the other manuscripts (S, A, and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) further indicate this continuity with a first-person pronoun in τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν. The subject of the verbless clause Πᾶσα σὰρξ χόρτος is the more definite Πᾶσα σὰρξ. The time reference is gnomic: something true as a rule. Similarly, the subject of the verbless clause πᾶσα δόξα ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου is the more definite πᾶσα δόξα. James 1:10 alludes to the ephemeral nature of flowering grass: ὁ δὲ πλούσιος ἐν τῇ ταπεινώσει αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου παρελεύσεται. Cyprian (Hab. virg. 6) used 40:6 to say it is vain to adorn the flesh, but also that no one should be made sad by death, in Test. 3.58. Theodotus (Excerpt 11) used 40:6 to argue that what deserves dread is not disease but sins. Origen (Comm. Matt. 11.3, 19) used 40:6 to say the flesh should be kept in subjection, “sitting on the grass.” Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) 10 reads: “Eva credidit et exivit de aqua fluminis et caro eius erat sicut herba de frigore aquae.”
7 The aorist forms ἐξηράνθη … ἐξέπεσεν were chosen because of the qatal form of יבשׁ and נבל, not because the aorist is the appropriate tense for gnomic statements. Eusebius recongnized the gnomic meaning when he said, ταῦτα μὲν καθολικώτερον ἐδίδαξεν ἡ προφητεία (2.16). The active of ξηραίνω means dry out, and the passive corresponds roughly to the English “dry up” or “wither.” 1 Peter 1:24 quotes this as διότι πᾶσα σὰρξ ὡς χόρτος καὶ πᾶσα δόξα αὐτῆς ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου· ἐξηράνθη ὁ χόρτος καὶ τὸ ἄνθος ἐξέπεσεν. James 1:11 continues quoting from the preceding verse, ἀνέτειλεν γὰρ ὁ ἥλιος σὺν τῷ καύσωνι καὶ ἐξήρανεν τὸν χόρτον καὶ τὸ ἄνθος αὐτοῦ ἐξέπεσεν καὶ ἡ εὐπρέπεια τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἀπώλετο.
8 The future tense of μενεῖ reflects the yiqtol form יקום. It could have been read as a Greek present tense, since only the accent distinguishes the present from the liquid future of μένω. Matt 24:35 alludes to the permanence of God’s word, but with no significant words in common with Isaiah: ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ παρελεύσεται, οἱ δὲ λόγοι μου οὐ μὴ παρέλθωσιν. Luke 21:33 uses almost the same words as Matthew, except παρελεύσεται for παρελεύσονται and παρέλθωσιν for παρελεύσονται. 1 Peter 1:25 continues quoting, τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα κυρίου μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
Lord comes to tend his flock(40:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 40:9-11]]
9 In G, the addressee of the singular imperative ἀνάβηθι would seem to be the same as in 40:6, until the vocative ὁ εὐαγγελιζόμενος Ἰερουσαλήμ is encountered. In Hebrew the change of addressee is more obvious, since the imperative here is feminine, but in 40:6 it was masculine. In G, the feminine cities Σιών and Ἰερουσαλήμ cannot be the ones bringing good news because the participles are masculine. The cities must be the objects of the verb, the recipients of the news. In Hebrew, the participles are feminine. G has plural imperatives ὑψώσατε, μὴ φοβεῖσθε, probably reading the feminine imperative yod endings in הרימי אל תיראי as masculine plural waw endings. The form εἰπόν is singular imperative, matching the feminine singular imperative אמרי. Eusebius implied the singular imperatives were addressed to the band of apostles (called Zion and Jerusalem), and the plural imperatives were to those who had believed these apostles. In G, the cities (ταῖς πόλεσιν Ἰούδα) could be in parallel with Jerusalem: all Judea’s cities are addressed. In Hebrew, Jerusalem addresses the other cities. In John 12:15 we find a collocation of not fearing, Zion, and ἰδού with God as the object: μὴ φοβοῦ, θυγάτηρ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεται, καθήμενος ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου.
10 Q and the great uncials SAB all have κυρίας “lady” without an epsilon; Rahlfs and Ziegler have κυριείας “lordship,” which could be spelled the same. Revelation 22:12 alludes to the Lord coming with his recompense, and to deeds: Ἰδοὺ ἔρχομαι ταχύ, καὶ ὁ μισθός μου μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ ὡς τὸ ἔργον ἐστὶν αὐτοῦ. Revelation 22:7 does not share much in common with Isa 40:10, but the commonalities with Rev 22:12 indicate the seer had Isaiah in mind there too: καὶ ἰδοὺ ἔρχομαι ταχύ. μακάριος ὁ τηρῶν τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου.
11 The Greek ποιμὴν ποιμανεῖ τὸ ποίμνιον alliterates even more than the Hebrew כרועה עדרו ירעה (the Greek has π, μ, ν in three words; Hebrew has ר and ע in the same three). But the replicated alliteration need not be intentional; the words G chose are the standard equivalents of those three Hebrew words. The phrase ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσας could not have the same referent as the masculine subjects of the verbs ποιμανεῖ and συνάξει, αὐτοῦ, so this phrase must describe the object of παρακαλέσει: he comforts the pregnant sheep. Isaiah 40:1 is recalled by παρακαλέσει.
Who has ever instructed Lord?(40:12-17)[[@Bible:Isa 40:12-17]]
12 The verb ἐμέτρησεν is from μετρέω “measure.” The dative τῇ χειρὶ is instrumental. The σπιθαμή is the span from the thumb to little finger of a spread hand. A δράξ is a hand or more specifically, a handful. A σταθμός generally refers to something standing: station, post, or in this case, a balance for weighing things (LSJ σταθμός III). A νάπη is a wooded valley, which is the opposite of the Hebrew גבעה, “hill.” A ζυγός is not only a yoke, but also a balance for weighing things (as in Rev 6:5).
13 The aorist tense ἔγνω corresponds to the Hebrew qatal. The Hebrew uses a verbless clause where G has ἐγένετο. Presumably the aorist was chosen to match ἔγνω. The form συμβιβᾷ is from συμβιβάζω, which normally means “bring together” or “infer,” but here these meanings do not fit. The Pentateuch used συμβιβάζω for teaching (Exod 4:15 and Deut 4:9), which fits the context here. The future is normally συμβιβάσω, but the Attic form is συμβιβῶ, used also in Ps 31:8. The Hebrew tense of יודיע is yiqtol. Paul quoted Isa 40:13 twice. In 1 Cor 2:16 he wrote, τίς γὰρ ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου, ὃς συμβιβάσει αὐτόν; ἡμεῖς δὲ νοῦν Χριστοῦ ἔχομεν. In Rom 11:34 he wrote, τίς γὰρ ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου; ἢ τίς σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο;
14 The verb συμβουλεύω in the active means give advice; in the middle (συνεβουλεύσατο) it means seek advice: From whom did he seek advice, and they instructed him? See the note on συμβιβάζω in verse 13. The form ἔδειξεν is an aorist of δείκνυμι. In this context, κρίσιν implies correct judgment, in parallel with ὁδὸν συνέσεως.
15 The particple εἰ could be an interjection (LSJ A), or marker of a strong assertion (BDAG 4). A σταγών is a drop (of liquid). A κάδος is a jar for liquid. The noun ῥοπή refers to the tipping movement of a scale, or the weight used to do so. Metaphorically, it symbolizes the decisive moment (in which the scales are tipped); here it is used in reference to the instantaneous nature of this movement. The form σίελος is an alternate form of σίελον, spittle.
16 The implication of Lebanon (known for its trees) not being “sufficient” (ἱκανός) for burning, in the context of τετράποδα and ὁλοκαύτωσιν, is that not even it could provide enough firewood for an offering suitable for God.
17 Acts 19:27 alludes to being reckoned as nothing when referring to the temple of Artemis: οὐ μόνον δὲ τοῦτο κινδυνεύει ἡμῖν τὸ μέρος εἰς ἀπελεγμὸν ἐλθεῖν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ τῆς μεγάλης θεᾶς Ἀρτέμιδος ἱερὸν εἰς οὐθὲν λογισθῆναι, μέλλειν τε καὶ καθαιρεῖσθαι τῆς μεγαλειότητος αὐτῆς ἣν ὅλη ἡ Ἀσία καὶ ἡ οἰκουμένη σέβεται.
To whom did you compare Lord?(40:18-24)[[@Bible:Isa 40:18-24]]
18 The aorists ὡμοιώσατε do not match the Hebrew yiqtol forms of דמה and ערך, respectively. The noun ὁμοιώματι is cognate with the two verbs in this verse, as the Hebrew דמות is with the first of the verbs. As Bartsch noted (Bartsch 1959), Mark 4:30 uses the same verb when introducing a parable via a rhetorical question, Πῶς ὁμοιώσωμεν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. Acts echoes the incomparable nature of God: γένος οὖν ὑπάρχοντες τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ὀφείλομεν νομίζειν χρυσῷ ἢ ἀργύρῳ ἢ λίθῳ, χαράγματι τέχνης καὶ ἐνθυμήσεως ἀνθρώπου, τὸ θεῖον εἶναι ὅμοιον.
19 The particle μή expects a negative answer to the rhetorical question: Has a craftsman made his image? Note the alliteration with χρυσ- in χρυσοχόος χωνεύσας χρυσίον περιεχρύσωσεν. None of the Hebrew words behind this phrase are cognates. Χρυσοχόος is a goldsmith; χωνεύω is contracted from χοᾰνεύω, to cast (metal); περιχρυσόω is to enclose with gold, whether by gilding or mounting. The verb κατασκευάζω means to make ready; in this case to construct it (LSJ 3). The clause χρυσοχόος χωνεύσας χρυσίον περιεχρύσωσεν αὐτόν has a main verb (the gilding) and an aorist participle (the smelting). The action of the (bounded) aorist participle takes place before the main verb.
20 The adjective ἄσηπτος means either not liable to decomposition, or undecayed. Both senses are applicable here. The form σοφῶς is the adverb of σοφός. What is sought (ζητεῖ) is information (BDAG ζητέω 2). The combination καὶ ἵνα is a bit awkward; here the καί makes more sense as an adverb than as a conjunction. The passive of σαλεύω means “be shaken.”
21 The futures γνώσεσθε and ἀκούσεσθε reflect the Hebrew yiqtol. The aorists ἀνηγγέλη and ἔγνωτε reflect the Hebrew qatal.
22 The participle κατέχων reflects the Hebrew participle יֹּשֵׁב. A γῦρος is a ring or circle. The subject shifts to the plural (οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες): the inhabitants of the world are like grasshoppers to him. The ἀκρίς is the desert locust, schistocerca gregaria. The singular subject resumes with ὁ στήσας. A καμάρα
implies a vaulted ceiling, with arches. The object of διατείνω is the sky: he stretches the sky out like a tent.
23 The particple διδοὺς (of δίδωμι) reflects the Hebrew participle. The preposition εἰς indicates purpose or result here: they rule in vain. The finite verb ἐποίησεν reflects the Hebrew qatal.
24 The plural subjunctives σπείρωσιν οὐδὲ μὴ φυτεύσωσιν translate plural qatals. The singular aorist passive subjunctive ῥιζωθῇ translates a singular qatal. The singular subject is ἡ ῥίζα. The form ἔπνευσεν is the first aorist of πνέω. The subject could be personal (God blew) or impersonal (it blew). The form ἐξηράνθησαν is the aorist passive of ξηραίνω. A καταιγίς is a gust of wind; it appears also in Isa 5:28; 17:13; 21:1; 29:6; 66:15 but in those cases it translates סוּפָה. Here, as in 41:16, it translates סְעָרָה. G also used it for שׁוֹט and הֶבֶל. Φρύγανον in the singular is a bush or dry stick; it is usually used in the plural, for dry brushwood. The connotation is that it is insubstantial (Hosea 10:7). Jeremiah 13:24 similarly uses the image of a twig blown by the wind.
The Holy One is incomparable(40:25-30)[[@Bible:Isa 40:25-26]]
25 Where Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the preferable indicative ὡμοιώσατε, Sinaiticus has the imperative form ὁμοιώσατε; it was not corrected by any later scribes. The Hebrew has a yiqtol form. For ὑψωθήσομαι Ziegler has ἰσωθήσομαι, on the basis of only 88, the Syrohexapla, and Jerome; Q’s margin lists ἰσωθήσομαι as the reading of Theodotion and Symmachus and εξἰσωθήσομαι as that of Aquila. The Hebrew form is weyiqtol. Although ὁ ἅγιος has the article, the Hebrew does not.
26 It is unusual for ἀναβλέπω to have an accusative τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς; normally this would be dative, as in Gen 18:2; 22:13; 24:63; 24:64; 37:25; 43:29. GELS refers to Renehan’s Greek Lexicographical Notes. Eusebius considered it equivalent to the dative, ὀφθαλμοῖς ὁρᾶν (2.18). The original hand of Q wrote κατεδίωξεν (from καταδιώκω); this was then corrected to κατέδειξεν (the reading also of A, B, S corrector cb3, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The verb καταδείκνυμι has etymological links to revealing and showing, but in Isaiah (40:26; 41:20; 43:15; 45:18; also Gen 4:21) tends to be used for verbs of creating, in a way similar to the English “bring to light,” hence “unveil.” The phrase ἐπʼ ὀνόματι translates בשׁם.
The relation of the prepositional phrases ἀπὸ πολλῆς δόξης and ἐν κράτει ἰσχύος to the main clause is unclear. Brenton took them with the preceding sentence. Silva has “because of abundant glory and by might of strength, nothing has escaped you.” Although λανθάνω (of which ἔλαθεν is an aorist) would typically mean “escape” in such a synctactical context, Eusebius interpreted ἀπὸ πολλῆς δόξης καὶ ἐν κράτει ἰσχύος οὐδέν σε ἔλαθεν to mean that because of all God’s power, no one ignores him (ἀπὸ πολλῆς αὐτοῦ δόξης καὶ ἐξυπερβαλλούσης ἰσχύος μηδένα τῶν καλουμένων ἀπειθεῖν). In this reading, κράτει ἰσχύος has an intensified meaning. Romans 1:20 speaks of the powers of nature, and Ephesians 1:19 and 6:10 use the same expression τῷ κράτει τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ (but genitive in Eph 1:19).
27 The form Ἀπεκρύβη is the aorist passive of ἀποκρύπτω, “hide.” The noun κρίσις, as in 40:14, refers to right judgement, i.e., justice. Israel should not complain that God is not acting justly. The form ἀφεῖλεν is an aorist of ἀφαιρέω, “take away.” The aorist ἀπέστη is from ἀφίστημι, and refers to putting distance between things.
28 The words εἰ μή followed by a secondary tense (such as the aorist here) generally are used for (1) the protasis of a contrary to fact conditional (Porter 1992, sec. 16.2.1.2), or (2) an exception clause (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.11). In this case, εἰ μή is not in the protasis, so the hearing provides an exceptional case in which one might know. The ἄκρος indicates the farthest point, the extremes, so when applied to the land “corners” is a fitting translation. The future form πεινάσει is from πεινάω, “be hungry,” and κοπιάσει is the future of κοπιάω, which refers to being tired from exertion. The noun ἐξεύρεσις is a literal translation of חקר, “searching,” indicating one can never comprehend this. The form φρονήσεως is the genitive of φρόνησις, “thinking.” Romans 1:20 continues to echo (with no verbal parallels) the theme that human knowledge of God’s sovereignity can be based on observing the natural world. Hebrews 3:4 uses some forms identical to Isa 40:28: πᾶς γὰρ οἶκος κατασκευάζεται ὑπό τινος, ὁ δὲ πάντα κατασκευάσας θεός.
29 The participle διδοὺς is from δίδωμι; πίνουσιν is the present plural indicative of πίνω, and ὀδυνωμένοις is the dative plural passive participle of ὀδυνάω, “pain.”
30 The word νεώτεροι refers to young men. The verbs πεινάσουσιν and κοπιάσουσιν recall 40:28. The infinitive absolute כשׁול יכשׁלו is translated by a neologism, ἀνίσχυς, which would be understood to mean “without strength.”
Those who wait upon God will not grow weary(40:31-41:1)[[@Bible:Isa 39:5-8]]
31 The participle ὑπομένοντες is from ὑπομένω. The future of ἀλλάσσω (ἀλλάξουσιν) “change,” is a literal translation of יחליפו. The verb πτεροφυήσουσιν means to grow feathers, as the phoenix does in 1 Clem 25:3. The ἀετός is the eagle (despite being used of vultures in Matt 24:28; Luke 17:37), which is a symbol of swiftness. That symbolism is used in Rev 12:14 (καὶ ἐδόθησαν τῇ γυναικὶ αἱ δύο πτέρυγες τοῦ ἀετοῦ τοῦ μεγάλου, ἵνα πέτηται εἰς τὴν ἔρημον εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς, ὅπου τρέφεται ἐκεῖ καιρὸν καὶ καιροὺς καὶ ἥμισυ καιροῦ ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ ὄφεως). The eagle is used as the Roman standard in Plutarch, Marius 23. The form δραμοῦνται is the future of τρέχω, to rush ahead. The pair κοπιάσουσιν and πεινάσουσιν recall 40:28-30. The form βαδιοῦνται is the future of βαδίζω, which means “go;” “walk” in contrast to τρέχω.
Who has renewed righteousness?(41:2–7)[[@Bible:Isa 41:1-4]]
2 We have no comment from Eusebius on Isa 41:2-7. The preposition κατά with the accusative typically indicates correspondence or distribution; here with πόδας Brenton and Ottley translated “to his feet.” Ezekiel 40:24 has the directional sense in ἥγαγέ με κατὰ νότον. Sirach 14:25 has hands symbolizing proximity in Στήσει τὴν σκηνὴν αὐτοῦ κατὰ χεῖρας αὐτῆς. But the closest parallel is Judges 4:10: Καὶ ἐβόησε Βαρὰκ τὸν Ζαβουλὼν καὶ τὸν Νεφθαλὶ ἐκ Κάδης, καὶ ἀνέβησαν κατὰ πόδας αὐτοῦ δέκα χιλιάδες ἀνδρῶν, where in English we might say they followed at his heels. The sense of δίδωμι εἰς (see BDAG 17.b) is like that of Isa 42:24; 50:6; Ezek 33:27; Jer 32:17; 33:6; 37:16; Dan 7:11; Ps 56:4; 65:9; 120:3, where one consigns something to a dreaded fate.
3 G has nothing corresponding to the MT לא יבוא “he will not go” and 1QIsaa לוא יבינו “he will not understand.”
4
Of the three nominatives Ἐγὼ θεὸς πρῶτος, the subject is Ἐγὼ because the most definite of the three. The adjective describes the noun attributively. Revelation 1:4 alludes to God’s past and future persistence using the words χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος.
4 The phrase Ἐγώ εἰμι first appears here in Isaiah, and it will appear again 21 more times by the end of chapter 56. Almost always (except 45:19 and 47:10, because the Greek is doubled yet the Hebrew is not) it represents a Hebrew first person singular subject pronoun: 15 times the shorter אני, and 5 times the longer אנוכי. In six instances (41:4; 43:10; 43:25; 46:4; 48:12; 51:12), it is in conjunction with הוא; twice (45:18 and 48:17) the phrase represents אני יהוה. Ἐγώ εἰμι is almost always (except for 56:3 “I am a dry tree”) spoken by God. The phrase has a noun complement in 45:8; 45:19 “Lord”; 45:22; 46:9; 48:17 “God”; an adjective complement “first” in 48:12, a participle complement in 43:25 (“the one who wipes”); 51:12 (“the one who comforts”); 52:6 (“the one who speaks”); a prepositional phrase in 41:4 (“in the future”); 46:4 (“until old age” and “until you have grown old”); 48:12 (“forever”); and no complement (“I exist”) in 43:10; 45:18; 47:8, 10. Because the Greek simply represents the Hebrew, these are not instances of the translator injecting a theological point into his translation. Eusebius made no comment here (2.19) about the phrase ἐγώ εἰμι, even though Symmachus used the same expression, καὶ μετὰ τῶν ἐσχάτων ἐγώ εἰμι.
5 G has ἔθνη in place of Hebrew איים. Ottley expressed doubt that G misread איים as גוים, but G confused waw with yod frequently, and it is not a stretch to suppose א might be read as ג.
6 Eusebius (2.19) explained the expression κρίνων ἕκαστος τῷ πλησίον καὶ τῷ ἀδελφῷ βοηθῆσαι to mean that those who had been called decided (BDAG ④) to help their neighbors (οὐ γὰρ μόνον ἑαυτοὺς σῴζειν οἱ κεκλημένοι ἦλθον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς πλησίον κατὰ τοὺς τῆς φιλανθρωπίας νόμους).
7 Because τέκτων is a noun, not a participle like τύπτων and ἐλαύνων, it is in parallel with χαλκεὺς; both are skilled tradesmen. The participles are both singular; because there is only one (singular) finite verb both nouns appear first, then both participles, the participles both describe the same person, who is doubly skilled. Barnes adduced σύμβλημα “joint” (of armour) in favour of his
argument that Isa 41:1-7 is a unity about a challenge to a trial by combat, in which Lord’s champion defeats those making preparations for war against him (Barnes 1903). Because ἰσχύρωσαν begins with an iota, the augment is not visible even though this is an aorist indicative. Athenagoras in Legatio pro Christianis 9 quoted 41:4 to say the Lord is our God; no other can be compared with him.
I have chosen you, servant Israel(41:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 41:8-11]]
8 The middle voice of ἐξελεξάμην is typical in biblical literature. The active appears in the Greek Bible only in 1 Macc 9:25 and 3 Macc 6:29 (and Ezekiel 20:38 in A and Q). The theme of God being fond of Abraham appears in James 2:23 Ἐπίστευσεν δὲ Ἀβραὰμ τῷ θεῷ, καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην καὶ φίλος θεοῦ ἐκλήθη. The seed of Abraham is mentioned in Luke 1:54 (τῷ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα) and Heb 2:16 (οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται). The Song of Three Youths 11; Apocalypse of Abraham 9.7; Testament of Abraham 2.6; 1 Clem 10.1 and Ignatius Mag. 10 call Abraham God’s φίλος “friend” based on 41:8, because he obeyed God’s commands (ἐν τῷ αὐτὸν ὑπήκοον γενέσθαι τοῖς ῥήμασιν τοῦ θεοῦ 1 Clem 10.1).
9 Matthew 12:18 alludes to the approved servant of God: ἰδοὺ ὁ παῖς μου ὃν ᾑρέτισα, ὁ ἀγαπητός μου εἰς ὃν εὐδόκησεν ἡ ψυχή μου· θήσω τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελεῖ.
10 The negative particle μή before πλανῶ indicates that the verb is not indicative; it is rather a middle/passive imperative, contracted from πλανά+ε+σο. The phrase μὴ φοβοῦ appears also in Acts 18:9 in a vision encouraging Paul to keep speaking: Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος ἐν νυκτὶ διʼ ὁράματος τῷ Παύλῳ· μὴ φοβοῦ, ἀλλὰ λάλει καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς.
Your opponents will vanish(41:11-16)[[@Bible:Isa 41:11-14]]
11 Eusebius used this paragraph to encourage those who preach the gospel in the face of those who oppose the word of the gospel and try to hinder them: you will survive and witness their destruction (2.20).
12 The future tense of παροινήσουσιν indicates that the raging is not taking place now, but is to be expected in the future from the opponents.
13 G has nothing corresponding to אני עזרתיך אל תיראי תולעת “I myself, I will help you. You must not fear, O worm of.”
14 God’s approval of the modest is also expressed in Luke 12:32 in conjunction with the command not to fear Μὴ φοβοῦ, τὸ μικρὸν ποίμνιον, ὅτι εὐδόκησεν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν βασιλείαν. Luke 24:21 subsequently mentions the hope for one who is to redeem Israel: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ. In Isaiah this redeemer is God; on the road to Emmaus it is Jesus.
15 The phrase ὡς τροχοὺς ἁμάξης ἀλοῶντας καινοὺς πριστηροειδεῖς has two accusative masculine plural adjectives, agreeing with the noun referring to wheels and participle for threshing, not to the pronoun object of ἐποίησα. The noun πριστηροειδῆς is classified as a neologism by LEH; the word for saw is πρίων. Eusebius (1.94) connected the threshing in Isa 28:24-29 with πριστηροειδέσι τροχοῖς. He made no extra explanation of this rare noun when he explained, “Just as they would chop up some straw by wheels of a wagon when threshing, so also when sawing up the demonic god-making of the Philistines and ungodly nations” (ὥσπερ τινὰ καλάμην διέτεμνον τροχῶν ἁμάξης τρόπον ἀλοῶντες καὶ καταπρίζοντες τῶν ἀλλοφύλων καὶ ἀθέων ἐθνῶν τὴν δαιμονικὴν θεοποιΐαν, 2.20). The adjectives conveying newness and the saw-shape indicate the effectiveness of the mincing. Ottley translated, “I make thee as wheels of a cart, that thresh out; new, with teeth like a saw.”
The Holy One of Israel will water the thirsty land(41:16-20)[[@Bible:Isa 41:16-20]]
16 Instead of the singular “Holy One of Israel”(ובקדוש), G has the plural τοῖς ἁγίοις. Eusebius noted that Aquila and Symmachus had the singular instead of plural.
17 Rahlfs placed the words καὶ ἀγαλλιάσονται with what precedes, but Swete and Ziegler put them in verse 17. Eusebius agreed with Swete and Ziegler; he said a new paragraph begins with καὶ ἀγαλλιάσονται οἱ πτωχοί (2.20). Although often Κύριος ὁ θεός is followed by a genitive (17:6; 37:21; 52:12 of Israel; 30:18 our; 37:4; 43:4, 15 your; 38:5 of your father David; 42:13 might), and therefore might be understood as two nominatives in apposition (i.e., the “God of Israel” specifies who this “Lord” is), just as often Κύριος ὁ θεός is not followed by a genitive, and serves as the subject of a clause (8:10; 41:17, 21; 42:5, 6, 8, 21; 43:1, 10, 12, 14; 44:2; 45:1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11; 51:22; 57:21).
18 According to Eusebius, this paragraph addresses the conversion of the Gentiles (2.20); the water is the saving word.
20 The passive forms of ἐννοέω are indistinguishable in meaning from the active forms (compare Judith 9:5). The π rather than φ in the form ἐπιστῶνται indicates that it is from ἐπίσταμαι (to understand), rather than ἐφίστημι (to position). The verb καταδιώκω means to pursue closely; καταδείκνυμι means to make known (see comment at 40:26).
Tell us the future(41:21-25)[[@Bible:Isa 41:21-24]]
21 The ability to predict the future is considered evidence of divinity. Eusebius disdained the pagan diviners and soothsayers who pretended to be able to predict the future; what little they were able to correctly predict was because of evil demons (2.21).
22 In the phrase τὰ πρότερα τίνα ἦν εἴπατε, the interrogative pronoun τίνα must be neuter nominative plural, matching τὰ πρότερα. In 41:4 τὰ ἐπερχόμενα refers to the future as a period of time, rather than to specific things that would happen in the future. Eusebius attributed the ability to describe the past to prophetic power, as Moses was able to describe creation (2.21).
23 Origen argued on the basis of this passage that even angels could not comprehend the limits of the universe: its beginning and end (Princ. 4.1.26). As in 36:12, the first-hand of Q wrote the noun αἷμα; the iota was subsequently deleted to match the adverb ἅμα of S and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); A does not include καὶ ὀψόμεθα ἅμα. Swete’s apparatus lists Q’s first-hand reading, but Ziegler’s does not; in 36:12, neither Ziegler’s nor Swete’s apparatus listed Q’s first-hand reading.
24 Instead of מאין “from nothing,” G read מאן “from where” (πόθεν), and instead of מאפע he read מארץ (ἐκ γῆς).
25 Revelation 7:2 alludes to the messenger from the rising of the sun in the words Καὶ εἶδον ἄλλον ἄγγελον ἀναβαίνοντα ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου ἔχοντα σφραγῖδα θεοῦ ζῶντος, καὶ ἔκραξεν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ τοῖς τέσσαρσιν ἀγγέλοις οἷς ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς ἀδικῆσαι τὴν γῆν καὶ τὴν θάλασσαν. Again Revelation 16:12 uses the same phrase when referring to rulers from the east: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου. Both instances in Revelation use the singular form rather than the plural that Isaiah uses.
Who will foretell the future?(41:25-26)[[@Bible:Isa 41:25-26]]
25 The Sinaiticus reading καταπατηθήσεται was changed by corrector ca to καταπατηθήσεσθαι, which is orthographically compatible with the καταπατηθήσεσθε of Q, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
26 According to Eusebius, the phrase οὐδὲ ὁ ἀκούων ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους has two meanings: (a) those who heard the word were not able to understand it; and (b) people would stop listening to the polytheistic deceptions.
No one else can do this(41:27-29)[[@Bible:Isa 41:27-29]]
27 Eusebius claimed that “Zion” and “Jerusalem” refer to God’s church, on “the way” to God and his heavenly kingdom (2.21).
28 The phrase ἀπὸ γὰρ τῶν ἐθνῶν ἰδοὺ has no counterpart in Hebrew. Ottley suggested it was brought in from 63:3.
29 Although all the manuscripts and versions read εἰσίν (and so does Rahlfs), Ziegler has οὐθέν on conjecture. Instead of the reading πλανῶντες, which Q and all the earliest uncials have (and so does Rahlfs), Ziegler has πλάσσοντες, supported by the Lucianic families of manuscripts.
Israel will bring justice(42:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 42:1-4]]
1 Eusebius insisted that the Jacob and Israel mentioned here refer to Christ, as the evangelist testifies (2.22). Matthew 12:18-21 quotes ἰδοὺ ὁ παῖς μου ὃν ᾑρέτισα, ὁ ἀγαπητός μου εἰς ὃν ηὐδόκησεν ἡ ψυχή μου: θήσω τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελεῖ. οὐκ ἐρίσει οὐδὲ κραυγάσει, οὐδὲ ἀκούσει τις ἐν ταῖς πλατείαις τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ. κάλαμον συντετριμμένον οὐ κατεάξει καὶ λίνον τυφόμενον οὐ σβέσει, ἕως ἂν ἐκβάλῃ εἰς νῖκος τὴν κρίσιν. καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν. Eusebius noted that the Hebrew and the other translations do not mention Jacob or Israel here. Typically modern commentators have identified the Servant of the Lord with Israel in the first and second song, but as an individual in the third and fourth song (van der Kooij 1997b, 383). Because the Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16 and 19:25, Arie van der Kooij suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” here in Isa 42:1 also refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as also in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394). The approval of one’s son appears in Matt 3:17, καὶ ἰδοὺ φωνὴ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν λέγουσα· οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα and Luke 9:35, καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῆς νεφέλης λέγουσα· οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἐκλελεγμένος, αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε. Luke 3:22 alludes to the spirit being upon one’s approved son: καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν ἐπʼ αὐτόν, καὶ φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι· σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα. In Luke 23:35 it is the anointed of God who is expected to bear his approval: ἐξεμυκτήριζον δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες λέγοντες· ἄλλους ἔσωσεν, σωσάτω ἑαυτόν, εἰ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ χριστὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ ἐκλεκτός. Eusebius claimed that the “Spirit” here is the Word of God: Τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ δοθὲν ἐπὶ τὸν “ἐκ ῥίζης Ἰεσσαὶ” προελθόντα αὐτὸς ἦν ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, ὃ δὴ καὶ ὁ Ἀπόστολος ἐδήλου φάσκων· “ὁ δὲ κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστι” (2.22).
2 Gzella noted that ולוא ישא is a remarkably literal translation considering G felt free to add interpretive elements in the preceding verse. Instead of the causative יַשְׁמִ֥יעַ, G read a passive ישמע (Gzella 2005, 404).
3 The preposition εἰς typically indicates not means but purpose (and here it translates ל), but Eusebius paraphrased the clause εἰς ἀλήθειαν ἐξοίσει κρίσιν to
mean that he proclaims God’s judgement with truth and boldness: Σὺν ἀληθείᾳ δὲ καὶ παρρησίᾳ τοῖς πᾶσι διεστέλλετο τὰ περὶ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ κρίσεως.
Gzella suggested that ἀλλά represents G’s attempt to make the contrast more explicit (Gzella 2005, 405).
Lord God, the creator, speaks(42:5)[[@Bible:Isa 42:5-8]]
5 Acts 17:24-25 uses wording from Isaiah 42:5 in ὁ θεὸς ὁ ποιήσας τὸν κόσμον καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν αὐτῷ, οὗτος οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς ὑπάρχων κύριος οὐκ ἐν χειροποιήτοις ναοῖς κατοικεῖ οὐδὲ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων θεραπεύεται προσδεόμενός τινος, αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσιν ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν καὶ τὰ πάντα.
Lord God called you to bring freedom(42:6-9)[[@Bible:Isa 42:5-8]]
6 Simeon’s prayer in Luke 2:32 alludes to the light to the nations, in conjunction with God’s people Israel: φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
7 Isa 42:7 is alluded to in Matt 11:5; Luke 1:79; Acts 26:18. The recovery of sight for blind people is mentioned in Matt 11:5 as part of a list of restorations: τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. In Luke 1:79, those seated and those in darkness are both mentioned, but in separate phrases: ἐπιφᾶναι τοῖς ἐν σκότει καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου καθημένοις. Acts 26:18 the opening of eyes is mentioned in connection with darkness: ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπὸ σκότους εἰς φῶς καὶ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σατανᾶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν.
8 The noun ἀρετή prototypically refers to something impressive or admirable. In contexts discussing morality, the English “virtue” serves the same purpose, but in contexts discussing events, it more commonly refers to military exploits when the agent is human, or miracles when the agent is divine (Josephus, Ant. 17, 130). In G, it always translates תְּהִלָּת, in Isa 42:8 as something of God’s that he does not give to others, in parallel with glory, but in Isa 42:12; 43:21; 63:7 as something of God’s that humans declare. The plural would then refer to his magnificent qualities (in this instance) or acts (in the other instances in Isaiah).
9 In light of the preceding association between divinity and the power to predict, Lord God is asserting his divinity.
Sing a new song to the Lord, distant peoples(42:10-12)[[@Bible:Isa 42:10]]
10 The singing of a new song appears in Rev 14:3: καὶ ᾄδουσιν [ὡς] ᾠδὴν καινὴν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου καὶ ἐνώπιον τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων.
11 Ottley suggested that instead of ישׂאו, G read שׂישׂ (εὐφράνθητι). Once again Eusebius preferred the translation of Symmachus, which mentions cities rather than villages. Eusebius said the inhabitants of Petra were at his time engaged in demonic deception (2.23).
12 Eusebius took the mention of islands as indication that this prophecy does not refer to the Jews, so he interpreted the destruction described in the next paragraph as the rejection of Israel (2.23).
Lord will no longer wait(42:13-25)[[@Bible:Isa 42:13-14]]
13 The prophecy depicts Lord God aggressively taking action; he is no longer patient. Orlinsky considered it impossible to tell if καὶ βοήσεται telescopes יודיע אף יצריח or the Greek corresponding to one or the other of these Hebrew words has dropped out (Orlinsky 1952).
15 Lord promises to turn things around. G has nothing corresponding to אחריב הרים וגבעות וכול עשבם אוביש.
16 The allusion in Acts 26:18 to Isaiah 42:7 is continued with mention of darkness into light: ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπὸ σκότους εἰς φῶς καὶ τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ σατανᾶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν.
17 G uses a variety of words to speak of idols. The first of them used here, γλυπτός, prototypically refers to something carved, and in the scriptures is almost always (in Isaiah the exception is in 46:1) a translation of the root פסל, which likewise refers to something carved. Other words for idols include χειροποίητος and εἴδωλον, which both typically are translations of אליל. In 30:22, פסל is translated as εἴδωλον. The second, χωνευτός refers to something cast of molten metal, and is almost always a translation of the root נסך, as here and 48:5.
18 Isa 42:18-19 is referenced in Matt 11:5 and Luke 7:22. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Luke 7:22 has the same without some conjunctions: ὅτι τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται.
19 Only S omits ἢ after ἀλλʼ, but the meaning is the same as ἀλλʼ by itself (Smyth 1956, sec. 2777).
21 Rahlfs placed the words καὶ εἶδον at the end of verse 21; Swete and Ziegler at the beginning of verse 22. There is punctuation before these words in Q: a middle dot. According to sense, the words belong with what follows (with Swete, Ziegler).
22 Although the hiding might be reflexive if αυτους was aspirated as αὑτούς, Eusebius interpreted what was being hidden as the schemes: “For in the very schemes that they were hiding” (ἐν γὰρ αὐτοῖς τοῖς λογισμοῖς, οὓς ἔκρυπτον, 2.23).
23 After εἰσακούσεται (Codex Vaticanus has εἰσακούσατε, a spelling variant of εἰσακούσεται), the first-hand of Sinaiticus added τῆς φωνὴς τοῦ παιδὸς αὐτοῦ; that reading was changed by cb2 to εἰσακούσεται, but the original wording was reinstated by cb3.
24 God takes credit for the defeat of Israel, for their disobedience.
25 The verb συμφλέγω is simply the emphatic συν prefixed to the common verb φλέγω used to refer inflaming or burning something. It appears only here in the scriptures, but it does appear in Plutarch, Alexander 60.2, where the soldiers are burned to death by the thunderbolts. The emphatic English “burn altogether” carries some of the etymological meaning of συν.
Lord God will protect Israel(43:1-9)[[@Bible:Isa 43:1-3]]
1 Lord God reassures Israel of his redemption and dedication. Eusebius interpreted these as those of superior rank who had received the saving word (2.24).
2 The fact that μετὰ σοῦ εἰμι is translated with the present tense even though the rest of the sentence is future and the following parallel is also future shows G’s preference to render the Hebrew verbless clause with the Greek present tense, as also in 43:3. The verb συγκλύζω is an emphatic form of κλύζω meaning to wash away in the sense of overwhelm rather than to remove filth.
3 For the spelling of σῴζων I follow Rahlfs and Ziegler rather than Swete’s spelling σώζων. The noun ἄλλαγμα appears only here in Isaiah; it prototypically refers to something given in exchange for something else, so is commonly used for “price” or “wages.” This noun and λυτρόω are used together in Leviticus 27:33, “You will not exchange a fair animal for a bad one, but if you do exchange it, then its ἄλλαγμα will be holy; it will be not redeemed.’ ” (LES).
4 The phrase “I have loved you” from Isa 43:4 is used in Rev 3:9, but the order of the words is changed, as is typical for Revelation’s use of Isaiah: ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἠγάπησά σε.
5 Matthew 8:11 and Luke 13:29 allude to the gathering of God’s people from the east and the west. Matthew has πολλοὶ ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν ἥξουσιν καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται μετὰ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν; Luke has καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. In Acts 18:9 Paul is told not to fear, with the same phrase as in Isa 43:5: Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ κύριος ἐν νυκτὶ διʼ ὁράματος τῷ Παύλῳ· μὴ φοβοῦ, ἀλλὰ λάλει καὶ μὴ σιωπήσῃς.
6 God’s sons and daughters are also mentioned in 2 Cor 6:18: καὶ ἔσομαι ὑμῖν εἰς πατέρα καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθέ μοι εἰς υἱοὺς καὶ θυγατέρας, λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ.
7 The perfect ἐπικέκληνται is passive; the active would mean “call upon.” According to Eusebius, “Christian” is the name by which God’s people are called (2.24).
8 A concessive participle normally precedes the main verb (see Porter 1992, sec. 10.5.1), but there is no main verb in the verbless clause καὶ κωφὰ τὰ ὦτα ἔχοντες.
9 The neuter plural ἀληθῆ could be the accusative object of the verb “say true things” or the nominative word spoken: “say, ‘True!’”
You are my witnesses(43:10-14)[[@Bible:Isa 43:10-13]]
10 In place of two words καὶ ἐγώ (the reading of S and B), Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have κἀγώ, as also in 44:4. The phrase ἐγώ εἰμι has meanings that differ depending on where the meaning is located: in the translator’s intention, in the understanding of a typical (non-Christian) Greek reader, and in the interpretation of early Christians. The translator was trying to be faithful to the Hebrew אני הוא “I am he,” i.e., “I am the one.” In context, the meaning is that there is no other God; He is it; He is the only one. What a native Greek speaker would have understood is a different question. Eusebius gave an indication of how an early Christian interpreter understood this expression when he wrote that the reason Christ came was to preach the knowledge of God to everyone, and understanding concerning him to those who were ignorant about him: τὸ γὰρ αἴτιον τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίας καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀποστόλων αὐτοῦ εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη μαρτυρίας οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν ἢ τὸ κηρύξαι τὴν τοῦ ἐπὶ πάντων θεοῦ γνῶσιν καὶ τὴν εἰς αὐτὸν πίστιν καὶ τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ σύνεσιν τοῖς πρὶν ἀσυνέτοις καὶ ἀσυνθέτοις καὶ ἀπίστοις καὶ ἐν ἀγνωσίᾳ οὖσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τυφλώττειν τοὺς τῆς διανοίας ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ περὶ τὴν πλάνην τῆς ἀθέου εἰδωλολατρίας εἱλεῖσθαι (2.24). In other words, he thought συνῆτε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι meant “that you might understand what God is.” The phrase ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι appears twice in John’s gospel, at and, as the object of knowing in John 8:28 (ὅταν ὑψώσητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τότε γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ ἀπʼ ἐμαυτοῦ ποιῶ οὐδέν, ἀλλὰ καθὼς ἐδίδαξέν με ὁ πατὴρ ταῦτα λαλῶ) and the object of believing in John 13:19 (ἀπʼ ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵνα πιστεύσητε ὅταν γένηται ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι).
11 I accent πάρεξ the same way as Rahlfs and Ziegler rather than as Swete’s epic form παρὲξ (Herodianus 2.63, 931).
12 As in 44:4, 10, καὶ ἐγώ is written as one word (κἀγώ), as also in A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); S and B use two words instead.
13 The image of existence since ancient times is picked up in John 8:58’s πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί and with the same wording in 1 John 1:1’s Ὃ ἦν ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς.
14 Luke 24:21 alludes to the one who was going to redeem Israel, in the words ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ.
Lord provides a path through the sea(43:15-17)[[@Bible:Isa 43:14-15]]
15 The verb καταδείκνυμι means to make something evident (see the comment at 40:26).
16 The image of walking on the sea is picked up in Matt 14:25: τετάρτῃ δὲ φυλακῇ τῆς νυκτὸς ἦλθεν πρὸς αὐτοὺς περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν.
17 In place of ἀλλά, the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs, Ziegler conjectured ἅμα, on the basis of the MT; this is attested by no manuscript or version. Q spelled θεός rather than using the nomen sacrum θς.
Lord is doing new things(43:18-24)[[@Bible:Isa 43:18-21]]
18 Revelation 21:4 alludes to the “former things:” καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, [ὅτι] τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν. Paul alluded to the new things being made, in contrast to the old things in 2 Cor 5:17: ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις· τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονεν καινά.
19 The allusion in Revelation continues into the next verse: Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ καθήμενος ἐπὶ τῷ θρόνῳ· ἰδοὺ καινὰ ποιῶ πάντα. The emergence of rivers is mentioned
in John 7:38: ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ, καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφή, ποταμοὶ ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος.
20 Although when ποτίζω has two accusatives (as in Mark 9:41) it means to give the object that is a liquid to the object who is a person. In ποτίσαι τὸ γένος μου τὸ ἐκλεκτόν one of the accusatives is an adjective in attributive position, so the personal object γένος is being given an unspecified drink. The chosen family is mentioned in 1 Pet 2:9: ὑμεῖς δὲ γένος ἐκλεκτόν, βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, ἔθνος ἅγιον.
21 First Peter 2:9 continues the allusion to Isaiah with λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, ὅπως τὰς ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλέσαντος εἰς τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς. See the comment at 42:8 on the plural of ἀρετή referring to impressive or admirable things. As examples of these magnificent acts, Eusebius listed the wonders (θαύματα) that he exhibited in Egypt, the Red Sea, and the wilderness (2.26).
22 In translating ἐκάλεσα, G read the first person קראתי instead of the second person קראת. Instead of אתי, G read עתה (νῦν).
23 The correction made by Sinaiticus corrector ca adds ἐδούλευσας ἐν ταῖς θυσίαις σου; these words are absent from Q and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). This reading is present in A, and was left in S by corrector cb2 (who tends to agree with A).
24 The verb προΐστημι refers to standing in someone’s presence attending them, not in a hostile way but often to lead, as in 1 Macc 5:19, or protect, as in 4 Macc 11:27.
Your fathers broke the law(43:25-28)[[@Bible:Isa 43:25-28]]
25 The verb ἐξαλείφω refers to making something disappear by wiping it. One might think the nature of this wiping is significant: it could be to paint over the sin (in which case the sin is still there but no longer evident), or to wash the sin away (in which case the sin is not evident because it has been removed). Herodotus (7.69) used the verb in the first sense, to describe the Ethiopians’ body paint, and Thucydides (3.20) used it to describe whitewashing. This is the meaning in Lev 14:42 and 1 Chr 29:4, where it is applied to buildings. But even in the cases where something non-physical is wiped, the result is that it no longer
exists, or at least it no longer comes to mind or has any import, as it is used regarding one’s name in Numbers 5:23, or one’s remembrance in Exodus 17:14. The reading of Q, A, and S, τὰς ἀνομίας σου, is followed by Rahlfs; B’s reading τὰς ἀνομίας σου ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, καὶ τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου is followed by Ziegler. The omission is a case of parablepsis due to homoioteleuton. The removal of sins is alluded to in Mark 2:7 (τίς δύναται ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός;) and Luke 5:21 (τίς δύναται ἁμαρτίας ἀφεῖναι εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ θεός;), where it is an ability accorded only to God.
26 As Eusebius, the oracle aims at repentance: the thing to be remembered is “what you once were,” and such remembrance of one’s sins constitutes confession.
27 Eusebius took the “rulers” as the nation’s leaders, and the “fathers” as the elderly. He preferred the translation of Symmachus, which has ἑρμηνεῖς “interpreters” rather than ἄρχοντες “rulers.”
28 Kim addressed the question of the “rulers,” arguing plausibly but inconclusively that the “rulers” of the Jews in the Second Temple period would have been priests because although Yehud had Persian civil governors from outside, the native authority was the high priest (2009, 200–209).
Lord God will provide water and spirit(44:1-7)[[@Bible:Isa 44:1-5]]
1 The noun παῖς is translated here as “servant” rather than “child” or “boy” for consistency with instances where it is in parallel with “chosen messenger.” Ekblad has pointed out that in contrast to the Hebrew Isaiah 41:1 where Lord threatens judgment on the nations, in Greek Isaiah 41:1 the nations judge the gods and ask Lord for counsel. In his words, “The LXX presents God as distinct from servant Israel and the unidentified servant. At the same time God is clearly identified with both servant Israel and the differentiated servant figure. This differentiation and identification are woven together in such a way the servant’s mission, persecution and final victory are at the same time those of God” (Ekblad 1999, 282–83).
2 Revelation 1:17 uses the expression μὴ φοβοῦ in conjunction with ἐγώ εἰμι, which appears in Isa 43:25: καὶ ἔθηκεν τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπʼ ἐμὲ λέγων· μὴ φοβοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος. Ephesians 1:6 refers to the beloved: εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ ἧς ἐχαρίτωσεν ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ.
3 According to Eusebius, the “Jacob” and “Israel” in chapter 44 are not the same as those at the end of 43. Because these names are now qualified by the expressions “my servant” and “whom I have chosen,” they must be referring to the apostles. The promise of “water” is therefore to these Christians, and the “water” is intellectual and spiritual (2.25).
4 The neuter participle παραρρέον (spelled παραρέον in Q, A, and S corrector ca) matches the neuter ὕδωρ. The verb παραρρέω is rare (in the scriptures only at Proverbs 3:21; Hebrews 2:1) but because it is a compound of ῥέω, the meaning of flowing past is clear enough. The preposition ἐπί indicates position relative to an object, but not necessarily that the position is over, on or above the object, as Revelation 3:20, where Jesus stands ἐπί the door and knocks. Eusebius said the willow is a parable of the intellectual waters flowing in the church (2.26): καὶ ἐνταῦθα δὲ τὴν ἰτέαν παρέλαβε διὰ τὸ ἀειθαλὲς καὶ νεαρὸν τοῦ φυτοῦ εἰς παράστασιν τοῦ πλήθους τῶν λογικῶν ὑδάτων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ αὐτοῦ ῥευσόντων.
5 The shift from third person ἐρεῖ to first person εἰμι indicates a shift to direct speech, hence the capitalized Τοῦ. The fronted Τοῦ θεοῦ puts the emphasis on the person to whom the speaker belongs. The future middle βοήσεται appears once in the first-hand of Q, A, S corrector cb2, papyrus 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) and twice in the first-hand of S, B, and in Q’s margin. The verb βοάω can take its future in the middle voice, and with an accusative object it can mean “call on” (LSJ II.1), but these are unusual uses. The reason βοάω is used is to represent the Hebrew יקרא (which without vowel pointing is ambiguous for active qal or passive Nifal). Eusebius settled the interpretation by taking it to mean that the person was claiming to be Israel καὶ πάλιν ἕτερος ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ βοήσεται, σεμνύνει ἑαυτὸν λέγων εἶναι Ἰσραήλ (2.25) In place of our manuscript’s ἐπιγράψει (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has ἐπιγράψῃ; A has ἐπιγράφει; B has ἐπιγράψει χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. Vaticanus has “the hand” (the tendency to correct towards the MT is why B is called “hexaplaric”), but even so, it is in the dative: ἐπιγράψει χειρὶ αὐτοῦ “with his hand.” Mirjam van der Vorm-Croughs noted this along with six other examples under section 5.6.2 “The omission of a nominal object.” Section 5.6, on “Implicitation by the omission of an object” begins, “Just as was the case with other sentence elements, objects were probably also mostly omitted because their information was seen as redundant (see e.g. 9:3[4]; 25:10; 26:20, 21; 28:4; 30:14, 33; 31:7; 33:12; 36:21; 40:20; 44:5; and 54:1 below). Furthermore they may have been deleted in order to circumvent a certain suggestion in the text (e.g. 37:28–29 and 59:13), or to give a broader validity to the words (e.g. 8:11 and
40:17). Lastly, they may sometimes have been omitted for the sake of parallelism (e.g. 44:7; 46:11; and 48:15).” She mentions it again in her section on Epiphora as a rhetorical figure: “A second omission from the Hebrew concerns the noun phrase ידו. By means of its deletion the third clause has become more parallel to the second one.” The idea of marking oneself for inclusion is picked up in Rev 13:6: καὶ ποιεῖ πάντας, τοὺς μικροὺς καὶ τοὺς μεγάλους, καὶ τοὺς πλουσίους καὶ τοὺς πτωχούς, καὶ τοὺς ἐλευθέρους καὶ τοὺς δούλους, ἵνα δῶσιν αὐτοῖς χάραγμα ἐπὶ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν τῆς δεξιᾶς ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ μέτωπον αὐτῶν.
6 The word πλήν here is functioning as a preposition (indicating an exception) rather than as an adversative conjunction. The claim to be first and last is picked up in Revelation 1:17’s μὴ φοβοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος.
7 Where Q, A, and papyrus 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read στήτω καλεσάτω, the original hand of Sinaiticus read στήτω καὶ λαλησάτω; the difference is between ΚΑΙΛΑΛΗ and ΚΑΛΗ. The first-hand reading of S was changed by ca to στήτω καὶ καλεσάτω καὶ λαλησάτω. Vaticanus has στήτω καὶ καλεσάτω καὶ ἀναγγειλάτω.
Carved gods are of no benefit(44:7–23)[[@Bible:Isa 44:9-10]]
9 The verb γλύφω is used mainly for engraving but also for sculpting. The verb πλάσσω is typically used for God forming humans at creation. The criticism of idolatry in 44:9-20 is echoed in Acts 17:29: οὐκ ὀφείλομεν νομίζειν χρυσῷ ἢ ἀργύρῳ ἢ λίθῳ, χαράγματι τέχνης καὶ ἐνθυμήσεως ἀνθρώπου, τὸ θεῖον εἶναι ὅμοιον.
10 The original reading of Sinaiticus with πάντες before οἱ πλάσσοντες (in agreement with Marchalianus and Alexandrinus, and adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler) was deleted by corrector cb2 (Vaticanus also does not have the word here), but the deleted word was reinstated by cb3. This is a rare instance of cb2 disagreeing with Q and Rahlfs and Ziegler; usually cb2 agrees with Rahlfs and Ziegler, and when cb3 reverts the reading it is in the direction away from Rahlfs and Ziegler. B places πάντες later, before ἀνωφελῆ. Q*, A, and Rahlfs and Ziegler agree with S here; Q’s margin allows for the second πάντες.
11 The relative clause ὅθεν ἐγένοντο most naturally qualifies what immediately precedes (“all those from whom they came”). The subject of ἐγένοντο would then be the gods that were made. The dificulty with this reading is that the plural verb ἐγένοντο does not match the singular θεόν. No better solution is evident (Eusebius did not comment on this sentence), so the English translation preserves the ambiguity of the Greek. The nominative phrase κωφοὶ ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων is preceded by καί, which connects this nominative plural with the other, πάντες ὅθεν ἐγένοντο, both functioning as the subject of ἐξηράνθησαν.
11 The verb ἐντρέπω is typically used in the passive to express feeling misgiving, and αἰσχύνω to express feeling or experiencing shame.
12 The original hand of Q wrote ἠργάσατο; this was then corrected to εἰργάσατο in agreement with S, A, B, and Rahlfs and Ziegler. The reading καὶ εἰργάσατο for the second instance agrees with B; S and A have εἰργάσατο, which is adopted by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
13 Porter said it is not the aspect (aorist) but the placement of the participle ἐκλεξάμενος before the main verb ἔστησεν that indicates that the choosing precedes the setting (1992, sec. 10.4.1).
14 The reading Κύριος without the article (the reading also of S and A) is followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has ὁ κύριος, so Swete uses the lowercase noun.
15 Just as in verse 13, the participle λαβὼν indicates the taking precedes the warming, and the burning precedes the baking.
16 The textual evidence for the first part of the verse is complex. The differences among the great codices and editions are presented in parallel here:
Q/R
S
A
B
Z
οὗ τὸ ἥμισυ
αὐτοῦ κατέκαυσαν ἐν πυρὶ καὶ
καύσαντες ἔπεψαν
ἄρτους
ἐπʼ αὐτῶν,
οὗ τὸ ἥμισυ
κατέκαυσαν
ἐν πυρὶ καὶ
καύσαντες ἔπεψαν
αὐτοὺς
ἐπʼ αὐτῶν·
οὗ τὸ ἥμισυ αὐτοῦ κατέκαυσεν ἐν πυρί, καὶ
καύσαντες ἔπεψαν
ἄρτους
ἐπʼ αὐτῶν,
οὗ τὸ ἥμισυ αὐτοῦ κατέκαυσεν ἐν πυρί, καὶ
ἐπὶ τοῦ ἡμίσους αὐτοῦ
ἔπεψεν
ἐν τοῖς ἄνθραξιν
ἄρτους,
οὗ τὸ ἥμισυ αὐτοῦ κατέκαυσεν ἐν πυρί·
17 Q*, S, A, B* all read εξελουμαι, but this must be the imperative with an object Ἐξελοῦ με (as with Q’s corrector, B corrector ab, Rahlfs and Ziegler) rather than one verb εξελουμαι.
18 The verb ἀπαμαυρόω/ἀπαμαυρόομαι is derived from ἀμαυρός, which means dim, faint, faded. According to GELS, the verb means to deprive of the ability to see. The simple verb ἀμαυρόω means to make dim but also in Deut 34:7 it is used to claim that Moses’ eyesight had not failed.
19 The reading of Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is τῇ καρδίᾳ; Sinaiticus scribe B initially wrote ἡ καρδία, but corrected himself with τῇ καρδίᾳ. The phrase is absent in Vaticanus. The translator uses a variety of verbs of knowing: ἔγνωσαν (γινώσκω), φρονῆσαι (φρονέω), τοῦ νοῆσαι (νοέω), ἐλογίσατο (λογίζομαι), ἀνελογίσατο (ἀναλογίζομαι), but the variation is not arbitrary; it matches the Hebrew. Similarly, the three terms referring to the person’s cognitive ability τῇ καρδίᾳ, τῇ ψυχῇ, and τῇ φρονήσει reflect some variation in Hebrew, but the Hebrew has only the first and last of these three. There is no Hebrew word here corresponding to τῇ ψυχῇ.
20 Instead of רעה “shepherd,” G read דעה, yielding γνῶθι.
21 God’s declaration of sonship is picked up in Jesus’ baptism at Luke 3:22, with the reordered σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα, in which παῖς is changed to υἱός.
22 The future λυτρώσομαι indicates that G read וגאלתיך instead of כי גאלתיך.
23 The accusative εὐφροσύνην is not a direct object of βοήσατε but modifies the verb in a more broadly adverbial way (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.3), indicating the joyful manner in which nature is to call out. Rev 12:12 alludes to this command to the heavens and other parts of creation to rejoice: διὰ τοῦτο εὐφραίνεσθε, οὐρανοὶ καὶ οἱ ἐν αὐτοῖς σκηνοῦντες.
Lord accomplishes all things(44:24-28)[[@Bible:Isa 44:24]]
24 The redeemer is alluded to in Luke 24:21 in the disappointment of the expectation that Jesus would be the one to redeem Israel: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ·
25 Because punctuation precedes but does not follow the words τίς ἕτερος, they belong with what follows (as Swete and Ziegler have it) rather than with what precedes (as Rahlfs has it). The notion of God making human wisdom foolishness is picked up by Paul in 1 Cor 1:20: ποῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; ποῦ συζητητὴς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου; οὐχὶ ἐμώρανεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ κόσμου;
26 According to Eusebius, the “servant” and “messengers” are the apostles and disciples and evangelists (2.27), and the rebuilding refers to the restoration after the destruction by the Babylonians.
27 Revelation 16:12 alludes to the drying of the rivers: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου.
28 Acts 13:22 applies identical words (with one transposition) to David: εὗρον Δαυὶδ τὸν τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, ἄνδρα κατὰ τὴν καρδίαν μου, ὃς ποιήσει πάντα τὰ θελήματά μου.
Cyrus, Lord God’s anointed(45:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 45:1-6]]
1 According to Eusebius, Cyrus was called ”anointed,” because God promoted him to the kingdom, following the Hebrew meaning of “anointed,” which referred to those that were led forward by God and anointed as kings (2.27).
2 Hoffmann noted that the Masoretic Text וַהֲדוּרִים אוֹשִׁר has the more difficult reading. G (καὶ ὄρη ὁμαλιῶ), 1QIsa (והררים יאושר), and the Syriac point to a common older Vorlage that provides the original text, upon which MT seeks to improve. The original text that can explain both the MT and G (along with 1QIsa and Syr) is והדרים אישׁר “and the ramparts I’ll grind” (Hoffmann 1972).
3 Ottley placed ἀοράτους in angle brackets; it is absent in the first-hand of A. Although the literal translation of θησαυροὺς σκοτεινούς is “dark treasures,” the darkness does not connote evil but rather safe-keeping; they do not see the light of day. The pair of adjectives ἀποκρύφους ἀοράτους appear without a corresponding noun to modify. The translation “hidden unseen things” is not meant to imply ἀοράτους is functioning substantivally and ἀποκρύφους attributively, but rather both adjectives modifying something elided, so that “hidden and unseen things” may convey the meaning better. Colossians 2:3 alludes to the hidden treasure of knowledge: ἐν ᾧ εἰσιν πάντες οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι.
Lord God makes all things(45:4-7)[[@Bible:Isa 45:1-6]]
4 The conjunction δέ that connects σὺ δὲ οὐκ ἔγνως to the preceding ἐγὼ καλέσω σε τῷ ὀνόματί μου καὶ προσδέξομαί σε would not itself carry an concessive sense (“although”); its semantic function is at most adversative (Porter 1992, sec. 12.2.7).
5 According to Eusebius, Cyrus turned to other (ancestral) gods, even though it was the one God who had anointed him and received him into his family (2.27).
6 Although a ἵνα clause typically indicates purpose, it can also express result or consequence (Porter 1992, sec. 14.2.2).
[[@Bible:Isa 45:6-7]]
7 The Hebrew behind κτίζω is typically ברא, but in Isaiah, ברא is translated more often with ποιέω (6 times compared to 4 for κτίζω, 3 for καταδείκνυμι, and 2 for κατασκευάζω). The Hebrew ברא only appears once in Isaiah before chapter 40. The first time G translates ברא as κτίζω is in this verse, though he has encountered the Hebrew word nine times by now. Following his usual tendency, he first uses ποιέω for ברא, then encounters עשׂה, which is a better match for ποιέω, so he uses ποιέω again. So when ברא appears immediately next, he opts not to use ποιέω for a third consecutive time, and opts for κτίζω instead. When ποιέω appears one more time, it reflects עשׂה again. The meaning of κατασκευάζω tends toward building and constructing rather than creating from nothing. So it is striking that God brings bad things (κακά) into existence; yet G’s choice of vocabulary simply reflects the Hebrew. The neuter plural κακά indicates not that God created evil but that God brings bad things (punishments) upon people.
Let the sky rejoice(45:8)[[@Bible:Isa 45:8-10]]
8 Eusebius certainly understood κτίσας to mean not just forming or establishing, but creation from nothing, since he referred to 2 Macc 7:28’s phrase “out of that which did not exist.”
Lord God formed you(45:8-9)[[@Bible:Isa 45:8-10]]
8 Eusebius certainly understood κτίσας to mean not just forming or establishing, but creation from nothing, since he referred to 2 Macc 7:28’s phrase “out of that which did not exist.”
Ask Lord God about what he produced(45:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 45:8-10]]
9 Because ποιέω is a transitive verb, the accusative neuter interrogative pronoun τί is the object “What,” rather than “Why.” Because it is neuter rather than masculine, it cannot be the personal “Who.” In Romans 9:20 Paul alluded to the ridiculous situation of the clay questioning the potter (ὦ ἄνθρωπε, μενοῦνγε σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ ἀνταποκρινόμενος τῷ θεῷ; μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι· τί με ἐποίησας οὕτως), but the quotation is from not here but Isaiah 29:16, which reads οὐχ ὡς ὁ πηλὸς τοῦ κεραμέως λογισθήσεσθε; μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι Οὐ σύ με ἔπλασας; ἢ τὸ ποίημα τῷ ποιήσαντι Οὐ συνετῶς με ἐποίησας; In Romans, because ποιέω has an object (με) the interrogative means “Why.”
10
The verb γεννάω is transitive, and ὠδινάω can be transitive (meaning to be in labour with something, as in Song of Songs 9:5; Psalm 7:15; Isa 66:8), so “What” rather than “Why” is appropriate in those cases as well. Prior to ὁ λέγων (the reading of Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the reading μὴ ἀποκριθήσεται τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πρὸς πλάσαντι αὐτὸν is present in the original hand of S; the phrase appears in Codex Vaticanus without the datives, as μὴ ἀποκριθήσεται τὸ πλάσμα πρὸς τὸν πλάσαντα αὐτό. (Ziegler’s apparatus gives the reading of S* as μη αποκριθησεται το πλασμα τω προσπλασαντι προς τον πλασαντα αυτον.) S corrector cb2 removed it so that the text matched the reading of A (and Q). Subsequently corrector cb3 restored the words back to the reading of B. Rahlfs and Ziegler prefer the reading of Q and A. The words τὸ πλάσμα τῷ πλάσαντι could be taken from Isaiah 29:16 (or from Romans), but even so ἀποκριθήσεται is original here and is not a harmonization to Romans.
11 According to Eusebius, God is speaking rhetorically here, showing that no one is in a position to question God or command him about his sons, daughters, or creations. Since no one can advise God, instead they should listen to his prophets (2.28).
Lord Sabaoth ordered the world(45:12-13)[[@Bible:Isa 45:12-13]]
12 In all the instances of ἐγώ in this verse and the next except for one, ἐγώ is a translation of a Hebrew first person singular subject pronoun. Its presence in Greek is therefore not because the translator wished to add any emphasis.
13 The verb ἤγειρα could be from ἐγείρω “I raised” or ἀγείρω, “I gathered,” but the more common ἐγείρω makes better sense in this context. Eusebius compared this raising to that of the Christ of God (2.28), who also loosed the pangs of death (Acts 2:24) and was established king (Psalm 2:6).
Foreigners will worship you(45:14-16)[[@Bible:Isa 45:14-16]]
14
Eusebius interpreted the phrase ἐν σοὶ to refer not to God’s presence among the people (the pronoun is singular after all), but rather to the indwelling of God in Christ: ὁ θεὸς ἐν αὐτῷ ἦν καὶ διὰ τὸν ἐνοικοῦντα ἐν αὐτῷ θεὸν καὶ αὐτὸς θεὸς ἦν (2.28). Paul, however, changed the pronoun to the plural in 1 Cor 14:25: τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ φανερὰ γίνεται, καὶ οὕτως πεσὼν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον προσκυνήσει τῷ θεῷ ἀπαγγέλλων ὅτι ὄντως ὁ θεὸς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστιν.
15 Eusebius took this opportunity to remind his readers that the name Jesus means saviour (2.28).
Lord will restore Israel(45:16-17)[[@Bible:Isa 45:16-17]]
16 Luke 13:17 quotes the phrase referring to all those who oppose him, saying that they were shamed: κατῃσχύνοντο πάντες οἱ ἀντικείμενοι αὐτῷ, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ὄχλος ἔχαιρεν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐνδόξοις τοῖς γινομένοις ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ.
17 The accusative σωτηρίαν αἰώνιον could be labelled an accusative of respect, like Luke 7:29 βαπτισθέντες τὸ βάπτισμα “being baptized with the baptism” or 1 Thess 2:4 πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον “to be entrusted with the gospel” (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.3.3). This eternal salvation is mentioned in Heb 5:9: καὶ τελειωθεὶς ἐγένετο πᾶσιν τοῖς ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ αἴτιος σωτηρίας αἰωνίου. Of the two negative predictions οὐκ αἰσχυνθήσονται οὐδὲ μὴ ἐντραπῶσιν, the second (subjunctive; the second aorist passive of ἐντρέπω omits the θ morpheme) is more emphatic than the first (future indicative). The verb ἐντρέπω is very frequent in Isaiah; only 2 Chronicles and Esdras A use it more frequently. In Isaiah it appears in chapters 16, 41, 44, 45, 50, and 54. The verb αἰσχύνω is used more frequently than in Isaiah only in the Psalms.
Only Lord announces truth(45:18-19)[[@Bible:Isa 45:18-19]]
18 If Isaiah is divided into sections according to instances of the expression οὕτως λέγει, the present section so delimited extends from 45:18 to 48:17. As noted at 40:26, καταδείξας is an act of creation etymologically related to revealing, hence the English “unveil.” Although the phrase ἐγώ εἰμι occurs relatively frequently here and in the next verse (as
noted at 41:4), G does not add theological significance to the phrase, but merely reflects it in his translation. Likewise, Eusebius did not see fit to comment on this phrase.
19 John 18:20 alludes to the public nature of the divine speech, when Jesus says, ἐγὼ παρρησίᾳ λελάληκα τῷ κόσμῳ, ἐγὼ πάντοτε ἐδίδαξα ἐν συναγωγῇ καὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, ὅπου πάντες οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι συνέρχονται, καὶ ἐν κρυπτῷ ἐλάλησα οὐδέν.
Only Lord is righteous(45:20-22)[[@Bible:Isa 45:20-21]]
20 As noted in BDAG, the passive form (συνάχθητε) of συνάγω can be used “with active force,” meaning “assemble,” as in Matt 22:41. The two accusatives τὸ ξύλον and γλύμμα αὐτῶν could be interpreted in apposition “the tree, their engraving” or as a double accusative, so that they life up “the tree as their engraving.” The singular form Eusebius used, γλύμμα, favours interpreting the relation as apposition.
21 Mark 12:32 alludes to this expression of the uniqueness of God: εἷς ἐστιν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ. Acts 15:18 also refers to what has long been known, using the phrase γνωστὰ ἀπʼ αἰῶνος.
22 Up to this point, G has been referring to the ends of the earth using τὰ ἄκρα τῆς γῆς (קצה in 5:26; 40:28; 41:5, 9; 42:10; 43:6; אפס in 52:10), but here the Hebrew is not קצה but אפס. Therefore G correspondingly switches to ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς, which he has previously used for מרחק in 8:9, and he will inexplicably now begin to use also for קצה, in 48:20; 49:6; 62:11. Therefore when he next encounters an expression referring to the ends of the earth using אפס in 52:10, to reflect the change in Hebrew, he changes his Greek choice back to τὰ ἄκρα.
Every knee will bend to Lord(45:22-25)[[@Bible:Isa 45:18-19]]
22
23 After examining intertextual relationships between Isaiah and Proverbs, Cook considered it unclear whether one of these books is dependent on the other, and suggested the scales tip slightly in favour of Isaiah using Proverbs (Cook 2010). However, because the expression shared by Isa 45:23 and Prov 3:16 is not in the Hebrew of Proverbs but is an addition to the Greek, the scales actually tip in the opposite direction (as Tov and Fox suggest). Rom 14:11 paraphrases and cites Isa 45:23 as ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ. Phillipians 2:10-11 applies it to Jesus: ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός.
25 According to Eusebius, the phrasing “seed of the sons of Israel” is significant because “sons of Israel” are the first evangelists, and their offspring are the ones who will be justified and glorified (2.29).
Bel and Dagon have fallen(46:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 46:1-2]]
1 The message that there is only one God, and others are imaginary continues with two named objects of worship: Bel and Dagon. The Hebrew corresponding to Dagon is נבו (Nabo, as B has it), falsifying Wutz’s (1933) hypothesis that G is a transcription of the Hebrew; Q’s margins further record the readings of Symmachus (Νεβούς) and Theodotion & Aquila (Ναβώ, as in B).
2 The participle πεινῶντι is spelled πινωντι in the first-hands of both Q and S, but the contracted vowel ω rather than ου indicates that this is not the verb πίνω, “drink,” but is rather πεινάω, “hunger” which also fits the context better. Among the three affirmative dative masculine singular participles describing the burden-carrier, there is one negated participle: οὐκ ἰσχύοντι. So although it is possible to translate “not to the strong one,” it is simpler to interpret the referent of this negated participle to be the same carrier of the burden (i.e., he has no strength) rather than introduce a new referent (one who has strength), and indicate that the burden is on the weak person and not on the strong one. Although οἱ is masculine and does not match the neuter αὐτά, there is no better candidate for a referent. The
referent cannot be the addressees because the verb δυνήσονται is third person rather than second person. Reading οἱ as the definite article rather than as the relative pronoun οἵ does not solve the problem; it makes the clause even more awkward. The adjective αἰχμάλωτοι is nominative because it describes the subject of the verb ἤχθησαν.
I made you and will lift you up(46:3-7)[[@Bible:Isa 46:3-4]]
4 The future of ἀναλαμβάνω takes middle forms, so there is no special reflexive sense to ἀναλήμψομαι. Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, here in 46:4; Q’s corrector deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; and from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5.
5 Q, A, and B have the question τίνι με ὡμοιώσατε; S has ὁμοιώσατε. The lack of augment in ὁμοιώσατε indicates the imperative, which makes τινί με ὁμοιώσατε not a question. The middle of τεχνάζω means to contrive cunningly.
6 The verb συμβάλλω has a prototypical meaning of encountering. But with gold as an object and “from a purse” as a modifying phrase, οἱ συμβαλλόμενοι clearly refers to contributing or lending, as in Plato Leg. 921d ὁπόσα δανεισμῷ ξυμβάλλει τις, οὗτος τῇ δραχμῇ ἑκάστου μηνὸς ἐπωβελίαν κατατιθέτω or Timaeus 47c λόγος τε γὰρ ἐπʼ αὐτὰ ταῦτα τέτακται, μεγίστην ξυμβαλλόμενος εἰς αὐτὰ μοῖραν. The nouns ζυγός and σταθμός have to do with weighing; ζυγός denotes the contraption for determining wight, and σταθμός tends to refer to the weights used in the contraption.
7 The first-hand of Q wrote αὐτὸν; the nu was later deleted, matching S, A, and B (Rahlfs and Ziegler).
I will do what I have decided(46:8-13)[[@Bible:Isa 46:8-11]]
8 LEH and BDAG note that when intransitive ἐπιστρέφω means “return;” when transitive, it means “turn.” Both ἐπιστρέφω and ἀποστρέφω typically have שׁוב behind them.
9 The repentance here was interpreted by Eusebius as a return to correct arguments that lead to recognizing his divinity (ἐπιστρέψατε ὀρθοῖς λογισμοῖς εἰς ἔννοιαν τῆς ἐμῆς θεότητος, 2.31).
10 Again, the ability to predict and perform promised events is presented as evidence that God is real. John 13:19 has Jesus claiming to predict happenings before they take place, using the words ἀπʼ ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵνα πιστεύσητε ὅταν γένηται ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι.
11 Eusebius interpreted the “bird” here as God’s servants who fly through the air, i.e., angelic powers, quoting Hebrews 1:14. Rev 16:12 speaks of the path prepared for those from the east: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου. The Sinaiticus reading ἐλάλησα καὶ ἐποίησα was changed by corrector cb2 to ἐλάλησα καὶ ἤγαγον (which is the reading of Q, A, B, Rahlfs, and Ziegler), and subsequently reverted to ἐλάλησα καὶ ἐποίησα by cb3. Because only S* attests the reading ἐποίησα in place of ἤγαγον, this reversion indicates that the mission of corrector cb3 was not to correct readings against a different exemplar, but simply to reinforce erased text. The words ἤγαγον αὐτὸν καὶ εὐόδωσα τὴν ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ were taken from 48:15.
12 Because the addressees are not specified, they are presumably still the “house of Jacob” and “remnant of Israel” from 46:3.
13 Luke 2:32 mentions Israel’s glory in the words φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
Virgin daughter of Babylon(47:1-4)[[@Bible:Isa 47:1-4]]
1 Now the addressee shifts to Babylon, the tender and delicate daughter of the Chaldeans.
2 The noun ἄλευρον refers to wheat flour used to make bread (Matt 13:33; Luke 13:21).
3 The former delicate lifestyle will be reversed. As Ottley noted, G was understandably at a loss when encountering אפגע, so he reached into his grab-bag of favourite words and pulled out παραδίδωμι. The resulting statement is unexpected, since usually παραδίδωμι is undesireable, and God is promising not to do so. Ottley concluded that God is warning that Babylon will be judged not by humans, but by God, but in light of the following verse, this could be intended as a positive thing.
4 Where the Hebrew speaks of the one who redeems “us,” G translated the one who redeems “you” (ὁ ῥυσάμενός σε), continuing the message that God favours the addressees. Eusebius noted that the interpretation depends on which version is read, since Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion all vary in their translations (2.32). Only G has “you;” the other versions all have “us,” and Eusebius commented only on the other versions.
Sit down, daughter of the Chaldeans(47:5-10)[[@Bible:Isa 47:5-7]]
5 Because the verb is imperative, the feminine singular κατανενυγμένη is vocative, meaning “you who are” taken aback.
7 According to Eusebius this prophecy is about the Chaldeans and their arrogance, that they thought their power would never end (2.32).
8 Instead of ἡ πεποιθυῖα, (the reading also of S, A, B) Rahlfs and Ziegler have only πεποιθυῖα, on the basis of 26, V, and the Lucianic family. Rev 18:7 alludes to the overconfident woman who boasts that she will never be a widow: ὅτι ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς λέγει ὅτι κάθημαι βασίλισσα καὶ χήρα οὐκ εἰμὶ καὶ πένθος οὐ μὴ ἴδω.
Calamity will come upon you(47:10–13)[[@Bible:Isa 47:9-12]]
9 The words τὰ δύο ταῦτα ἐν μιᾷ ἡμέρᾳ χηρεία καὶ ἀτεκνία ἥξει ἐξαίφνης ἐπὶ σὲ are absent in B due to the repeated ἐπὶ σὲ. Q, S, Ziegler, and Swete spell φαρμακείᾳ as φαρμακίᾳ. Rev 18:8 continues the allusion by predicting the woman’s single-day double tragedy: διὰ τοῦτο ἐν μιᾷ ἡμέρᾳ ἥξουσιν αἱ πληγαὶ αὐτῆς, θάνατος καὶ πένθος καὶ λιμός, καὶ ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται, ὅτι ἰσχυρὸς κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ κρίνας αὐτήν. Revelation 18:23 uses the exact phrase from Isa 47:9: καὶ φῶς λύχνου οὐ μὴ φάνῃ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι, καὶ φωνὴ νυμφίου καὶ νύμφης οὐ μὴ ἀκουσθῇ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι· ὅτι οἱ ἔμποροί σου ἦσαν οἱ μεγιστᾶνες τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἐν τῇ φαρμακείᾳ σου ἐπλανήθησαν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη.
10 After γνῶθι, Q, A (Rahlfs and Ziegler) read, and S corrector ca added ὅτι. Then (according to codexsinaiticus.org) S corrector cb2 deleted the addition, leaving only γνῶθι again. This is an unusual case in that Q and Ziegler disagree with cb2’s change. Instead of the genitive singular πονηρίας, “wickedness” (the reading of Q’s corrector, A, B, Rahlfs, and Ziegler) or πορνίας, illicit sexual activity (the reading of S), the original-hand of Q has πονηρας, which could be accented as πονηρᾶς (genitive singular), “evil” or as πονηράς (accusative plural), “wicked” or “evil things.” The “understanding” refers to the witchcraft in the previous verse.
11 Instead of שחרה “its dawning,” G read שוחה “a pit.”
13 Babylonians had a reputation for astrological proficiency. Eusebius pointed to Daniel as confirmation of this reputation (2.32).
There will be no salvation for you(47:14-15)[[@Bible:Isa 48:1-2]]
14 Instead of the passive κατακαυθήσονται (the reading of S and B), Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have κατακαήσονται. Rev 18:8 continues to draw from Isaiah, this time using the image of burning by fire: διὰ τοῦτο ἐν μιᾷ ἡμέρᾳ ἥξουσιν αἱ πληγαὶ αὐτῆς, θάνατος καὶ πένθος καὶ λιμός, καὶ ἐν πυρὶ κατακαυθήσεται, ὅτι ἰσχυρὸς κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ κρίνας αὐτήν.
15 The phrase καθʼ ἑαυτόν is distributive, indicating that the deception applies to every person.
Listen, Israel(48:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 48:1-2]]
1 Israel is addressed with an accusation that although they swear by God’s name, they do not do so sincerely.
2 Matthew 4:5 refers to Jerusalem as the holy city in the story of Jesus’ temptation: Τότε παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ.
I foretold the former things(48:4-5)[[@Bible:Isa 48:3-5]]
5 Rahlfs and Ziegler disagree about the originality of πάλαι and μοι. Instead of μοι Rahlfs has μου, a reading supported by 106 V C 46 and the Hebrew. Q matches Ziegler in this verse.
You do not know the future(48:5-9)[[@Bible:Isa 48:6-9]]
6 Although Israel was informed, they did not listen or understand. Papyrus Alex. 203 from the third or fourth centuries covers parts of Isa 48:6-18 (Carlini 1978). When the adverb νῦν has a definite article, it indicates the present time. The phrase ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι is used also in Revelation 1:19: γράψον οὖν ἃ εἶδες καὶ ἃ εἰσὶν καὶ ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα.
7 Where the Hebrew has the second negator ולוא after “and past day,” G put it before this phrase. According to Eusebius, the addressees were unaware of what was going to happen until God told them (2.33).
8 Here γινώσκω translates שׁמע and ἐπίσταμαι translates ידע. Although ידע is the usual Hebrew behind ἐπίσταμαι, the reverse is not true; ידע is usually translated as γινώσκω and שׁמע usually becomes ἀκούω. There is considerable overlap between the semantic ranges of γινώσκω and ἐπίσταμαι, but γινώσκω is the broader term and relates to familiarity generally, whereas ἐπίσταμαι typically refers to mental understanding. Although the combination of the participle and cognate indicative ἀθετῶν ἀθετήσεις is not standard Greek, Eusebius did not comment on this grammatical peculiarity. His comment Οἶδα γὰρ καὶ πρὸ τούτου γινώσκων, ὡς ἀθετῶν ἀθετήσεις (2.32) indicates that he understood the participle adverbially “rebellingly, you will rebel,” rather than substantivally “you, a rebel, will rebel.” Although the verb is future in the clause καὶ ἄνομος ἔτι ἐκ κοιλίας κληθήσῃ, Eusebius interpreted it to mean that already by the time of birth the addressee was considered a transgressor (πρὶν γεννηθῆναί σε ἄνομος καὶ παράνομος ἐκέκλησο, 2.33).
9 Instead of אאריך “I will defer,” G read אראך “I will show.”
I will rescue you for my own reputation(48:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 48:10-11]]
10 The placement of the negator οὐχ before ἕνεκεν rather than the verb πέπρακα indicates that the selling took place, but it was not for money. Eusebius explained that it was for a different reason: to help, to chasten, because of sins and impiety, quoting Isaiah 50:1 “for your sins you were sold” (2.33).
11 The Hebrew has a repetition למעני למעני that is represented only once by G ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ. Where the Hebrew has איכה G (inexplicably) has τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα.
The creator will call them(48:12-15)[[@Bible:Isa 48:12-14]]
12 Revelation 1:17 alludes to the claim, “I am the first” and the last: καὶ ἔθηκεν τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπʼ ἐμὲ λέγων· μὴ φοβοῦ· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος.
13 Paul uses the vocabulary of “calling” to refer to God’s creative acts in Romans 4:17 καθὼς γέγραπται ὅτι πατέρα πολλῶν ἐθνῶν τέθεικά σε, κατέναντι οὗ ἐπίστευσεν θεοῦ τοῦ ζῳοποιοῦντος τοὺς νεκροὺς καὶ καλοῦντος τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς ὄντα. The adverb ἅμα in G tends to be used to express unity rather than simulteneity. Twice ἅμα is used as a preposition with the dative (18:6; 24:14), also expressing unity.
14 Instead of MT כלכם “all of you,” G read 1QIsaa כולם “all of them.” Instead of זְרוֹע “arm,” G read זֶרַע “seed.”
Lord showed you how to find the way(48:16–22)[[@Bible:Isa 48:14-19]]
16 In Sinaiticus, the reading ἐλάλησα οὐδὲ ἐν τόπῳ γῆς σκοτεινῷ (the reading also of A, except Ottley spelled σκοτινῷ, and followed by Rahlfs) was shortened by ca to simply ἐλάλησα (which is what Q has and what Ziegler followed); B has λελάληκα. Until this point, God has been speaking in the first person, but here Lord appears as the subject in the third person in a sentence with a first person object (“Lord sent me”). So it is unclear who is the speaker in the first half of this verse.
19 The meaning of οὐ μή with the aorist subjunctive is debated (Porter 19.2.1). Smyth noted that “οὐ μή with the subjunctive of the second person in the dramatic poets occasionally expresses a strong prohibition” (1800.c) and from there “οὐ μή with the aorist (less often the present) subjunctive” became an emphatic denial (1804).
20 This is the first time G has referred to Lord’s δοῦλος. In 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21, 26; 45:4, the figure known in English as the “servant” of the Lord is called παῖς. The only other mentions are in 49:3, 5, 7. So δοῦλος for עבד is clustered in 48:20-49:7, but with one intervening παῖς in 49:6. Revelation 18:4 alludes to coming out of Babylon: Καὶ ἤκουσα ἄλλην φωνὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ λέγουσαν· ἐξέλθατε ὁ λαός μου ἐξ αὐτῆς ἵνα μὴ συγκοινωνήσητε ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις αὐτῆς, καὶ ἐκ τῶν πληγῶν αὐτῆς ἵνα μὴ λάβητε.
21 The (liquid) future of πίνω does not have the ν because the ν is added to the root *πι to form the present stem.
22 The infinitive χαίρειν is a verbal noun, which in English corresponds to “rejoicing” rather than “to rejoice.”
Lord called me as his servant Israel(49:1-6)[[@Bible:Isa 49:1-4]]
1 Since the verb is second person imperative, νῆσοι … ἔθνη is the vocative addressee. The parallelism and punctuation indicates ἔθνη is a vocative, in parallel with νῆσοι, which would translate as “Listen to me, islands, and pay attention, nations! It will stand through much time.” Unless we are to suppose Lord was named and was born from his mother’s womb, the speech from Lord must end after λέγει Κύριος, and the prophet begins to speak. Eusebius quoted 49:1 (and 6 and 7) to say the Gentiles are called, to refute the claim of
“the circumcision” that they are preferred or privileged, and to predict the birth of Christ (Dem. ev. 2.1.24; 2.2.14).
2 The prophet continues to speak of his commission from Lord. The oral sword is alluded to in Eph 6:17 καὶ τὴν περικεφαλαίαν τοῦ σωτηρίου δέξασθε καὶ τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ; in Heb 4:12 Ζῶν γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐνεργὴς καὶ τομώτερος ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν μάχαιραν δίστομον; Rev 1:16 καὶ ἔχων ἐν τῇ δεξιᾷ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ ἀστέρας ἑπτὰ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ ῥομφαία δίστομος ὀξεῖα ἐκπορευομένη; 2:12 Τάδε λέγει ὁ ἔχων τὴν ῥομφαίαν τὴν δίστομον τὴν ὀξεῖαν; and 19:15 καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ ἐκπορεύεται ῥομφαία ὀξεῖα, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῇ πατάξῃ τὰ ἔθνη.
3 Lord addresses the prophet as his servant, Israel. Eusebius (2.35) identified the servant as Jesus, alluding to his taking the form of a servant in Philippians 2:7. Because the Servant is named Israel in 49:3, and so are “my people in Egypt” in 11:16 and 19:25, Arie van der Kooij suggested “Israel” and “Jacob” in Isa 42:1 also refer not to the people of Israel but to the Servant as a particular group of the Jewish people, as here in 49:3-5 (1997b, 394).
4 The prophet (the servant, Israel), responds to Lord’s commission. Paul alluded to laboring in vain in Phil 2:16: λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες, εἰς καύχημα ἐμοὶ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα. Eusebius (2.35) connected this vain labour to those that persisted in unbelief in Romans 11:23.
5 The servant introduces Lord’s words, but they do not appear immediately after the clause containing the phrase οὕτως λέγει Κύριος. Instead, the servant includes a parenthetical note about being himself gathered, before resuming his account of Lord’s words after the resumptive phrase καὶ εἶπέν μοι in 49:6. Eusebius continued identifying the servant as the Son, who was originally sent to Israel, according to Matt 10:5-6. Arie van der Kooij argued that Greek Isa 11:11-16 and 49:5-6 (in contrast to the Hebrew) distinguish two groups in exile: (a) the people of Israel, and (b) a particular group of Jews. G presents the Servant in exile who “shall be gathered” (49:5) as “my people in Egypt” in 11:16. In van der Kooij’s
view, this group is the followers of Onias IV in Egypt (1997b, 395). Instead of וישׂראל לא יאסף (MT) or וישראל לויאסף (1QIsaa), G read וישראלואאסף, with waw-aleph instead of aleph-yod or waw-yod, and one lamed instead of two.
6 The clause μέγα σοί ἐστιν τὸ κληθῆναί σε παῖδά μου has an infinitive as the subject. One might be tempted to translate, “It is a great thing for you to be called my servant” but that would disregard one of the second person pronouns. Eusebius did not interpret the phrase κληθῆναί σε παῖδά μου in reference to the Father/Son relationship, but rather to the servanthood of Jesus, as described Philippians 2:7.
A light of nations(49:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 49:6]]
6 After τέθεικά σε εἰς (the reading also of A, followed by Ziegler), S and B (followed by Rahlfs) add the words διαθήκην γένους εἰς. Eusebius also quoted καὶ ἔδωκά σε εἰς διαθήκην ἐθνῶν, but that is probably from 49:8. Luke 2:32 refers to the light revealed to the Gentiles: φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ. Acts 1:8 uses the expression referring to the extent of the mission to the end of the earth: καὶ ἔσεσθέ μου μάρτυρες ἔν τε Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ ἐν πάσῃ τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ καὶ Σαμαρίᾳ καὶ ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς. The tribes of Israel are mentioned in Rev 7:4, Καὶ ἤκουσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐσφραγισμένων, ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες, ἐσφραγισμένοι ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ; Acts 13:47 quotes the verse more completely: τέθεικά σε εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν τοῦ εἶναί σε εἰς σωτηρίαν ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς. Van de Sandt discussed the function this prophecy served in Luke’s conception of the role Israel played in the salvation of the Gentiles (van de Sandt 1994).
7 Instead of τῶν δούλων (the reading of Q, S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has τὸν δοῦλον, supported only by manuscripts from the 9th century on (89, 90, 130, 311), Jerome, and the MT.
A covenant for nations(49:8-12)[[@Bible:Isa 49:8-9]]
8 There is an exact citation of this verse (except for the variant σοι in Sinaiticus) in 2 Cor 6:2: λέγει γάρ· καιρῷ δεκτῷ ἐπήκουσά σου καὶ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ σωτηρίας ἐβοήθησά σοι. The phrase Καιρῷ δεκτῷ is linked with salvation (ἡμέρᾳ σωτηρίας) here.
9 Luke 2:32 mentions salvation to the end of the earth in a quote of a preceding verse (49:6) and alludes to revelation to those in darkness φῶς εἰς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου Ἰσραήλ.
10 The verb normally spelled διψήσουσιν is in Q spelled διψάσουσιν (the reading also of B and S); there is a lacuna (διψα´σουσιν) where it appears an iota may have deleted. Q’s marginal note records the reading of Theodotion and Symmachus as διψήσουσιν, and identifies the reading of Aquila (διψάσουσιν) as that of the Seventy. Above the alpha, one of Q’s later correctors added eta, allowing for διψήσουσιν to be read. John 7:37 alludes to the satisfaction of thirst: Ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ μεγάλῃ τῆς ἑορτῆς εἱστήκει ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἔκραξεν λέγων· ἐάν τις διψᾷ ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω. Rom 9:16 mentions the god who shows mercy: ἄρα οὖν οὐ τοῦ θέλοντος οὐδὲ τοῦ τρέχοντος ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἐλεῶντος θεοῦ. Rev 7:16-17 has οὐ πεινάσουσιν ἔτι οὐδὲ διψήσουσιν ἔτι, οὐδὲ μὴ πέσῃ ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς ὁ ἥλιος οὐδὲ πᾶν καῦμα, ὅτι τὸ ἀρνίον τὸ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ θρόνου ποιμανεῖ αὐτούς καὶ ὁδηγήσει αὐτοὺς ἐπὶ ζωῆς πηγὰς ὑδάτων.
11 In commenting on 49:11, Eusebius noted that there are three ways to interpret Zion and Jerusalem: (1) the Jewish way; (2) every religious government; (3) the angelic city in heaven (Gal 4:26). He considered this prophecy an example of meaning (2): the religious government of the Jews had been converted into the church of the nations (2.35).
12 Luke 13:29 mentions coming from all four cardinal directions: καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ.
Let creation rejoice!(49:13)[[@Bible:Isa 49:13]]
13 After εὐφροσύνην, the first-hand of Sinaiticus added the phrase καὶ οἱ βουνοὶ δικαιοσύνην (the reading adopted by Rahlfs); this was deleted by corrector cb2 (matching the reading of Q, A, B, and Ziegler) but was reverted by cb3 (back to καὶ οἱ βουνοὶ δικαιοσύνην). The accusative in the clause ῥηξάτωσαν τὰ ὄρη εὐφροσύνην is adverbial. LSJ indicates the verb ῥήγνυμι was used with an accusative of one’s voice (Herodotus 1.85) or tears. Luke 2:25 mentions Simeon was awaiting the comforting of Israel: Καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ἦν ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ ᾧ ὄνομα Συμεὼν καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ εὐλαβὴς προσδεχόμενος παράκλησιν τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, καὶ πνεῦμα ἦν ἅγιον ἐπʼ αὐτόν. God’s encouragment to the humble is alluded to in 2 Cor 7:6: ἀλλʼ ὁ παρακαλῶν
τοὺς ταπεινοὺς παρεκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ Τίτου. The heavens are told to rejoice in Rev 12:12: διὰ τοῦτο εὐφραίνεσθε, οὐρανοὶ καὶ οἱ ἐν αὐτοῖς σκηνοῦντες.
I will never forget you(49:14-15)[[@Bible:Isa 49:14-15]]
14 Zion is presented as thinking God had abandoned them.
15 In response to that misperception, Zion is reassured that God is even more devoted to them than a human could ever be to another human.
You will be rebuilt quickly(49:16-19)[[@Bible:Isa 49:16-17]]
16 That supernatural devotion is symbolized by painting walls on God’s hands, an image that Eusebius interpreted to mean that the true Zion is invincible and eternal (on God’s hands); religious government is this city of God (2.36).
17 Instead of בָנַיִךְ “your sons,” G read בֹּנַיִךְ “your builders,” along with 1QIsaa בוניך.
18 Paul quoted ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος as an oath formula in Rom 14:11: ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ. Paul combines 49:18 with 45:23.
19 The reading στενοχωρήσει, which is also in Q, A, and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) was changed in Sinaiticus by scribe B himself, from στενοχωρήσῃ. The intransitive use of στενοχωρέω is unusual. Normally this verb is passive expressing a crowded state, or has an object, expressing confinement. The present participle οἱ καταπίνοντές σε indicates that the swallowing is ongoing.
Foreigners will serve you(49:20–23)[[@Bible:Isa 49:18-21]]
20 Although the notion of making room is unusual for נגשׁ, this sense appears also in Gen 19:9, where it is translated ἀφίστημι in the story of Lot in Sodom.
21 The nominative adjective μόνη provides a characteristic of the nominative pronoun ἐγώ. Whether that should be translated as “I have been left alone” or “I alone have been left” depends on whether the meaning of the Greek is that
the speaker is the only person left, or that she has been deserted. The context and parallelism (surprise that she would have sons) would indicate that her desertion is in view.
22 Luke 15:5 speaks of carrying a sheep on one’s shoulders: καὶ εὑρὼν ἐπιτίθησιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὤμους αὐτοῦ χαίρων.
23 In the context of bowing, ἐπὶ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς would indicate the direction or extent of the bowing: toward or all the way to the ground. Rev 3:9 uses the image of compelling authorities to bow before the addressees: ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἠγάπησά σε.
Lord will rescue you from your giant oppressors(49:24-25)[[@Bible:Isa 49:24-26]]
24 The rhetorical question presents the expectation that one cannot steal from the powerful. According to Eusebius, this “giant” is the devil (2.36).
25 The force of the participle λαμβάνων is uncertain; it could be temporal “when he takes from a strong man” or concessive “although he takes from a strong man.” The parallel ἐάν indicates that these are hypothetical cases, so the English “when” is an appropriate translation, but in a casuistic rather than temporal sense.
I am he who rescues you(49:25-26)[[@Bible:Isa 49:24-26]]
26 The verb ἀντιλαμβάνω in the middle denotes helping, and takes its object in the genitive (ἰσχύος). Rev 16:6 refers to drinking blood: ὅτι αἷμα ἁγίων καὶ προφητῶν ἐξέχεαν καὶ αἷμα αὐτοῖς δέδωκας πιεῖν, ἄξιοί εἰσιν.
You were sold for your sins(50:1-5)[[@Bible:Isa 50:1-2]]
1 The dative pronoun τίνι is interrogative (“to which?”), and matches the dative ὑπόχρεῳ, for “to which debtor.”
2 The adjective in the phrase θήσω ποταμοὺς ἐρήμους could be functioning attributively (“I will make rivers desolate”) or substantivally (“I will turn rivers into deserts”). In Isa 5:9, a plural subject “cities” become a singular ἔρημος, indicating a substantival function; similarly in 15:6 a neuter subject “water” becomes a non-neuter ἔρημος.
3 Revelation 6:12 also compares the darkened sun to sackcloth: καὶ σεισμὸς μέγας ἐγένετο καὶ ὁ ἥλιος ἐγένετο μέλας ὡς σάκκος τρίχινος καὶ ἡ σελήνη ὅλη ἐγένετο ὡς αἷμα.
4 Instead of παιδίας “childhood” (the reading also of S and B), A has σοφίας; Q’s corrector (Rahlfs and Ziegler) spelled it παιδείας “instruction,” which is a defensible reading because the two words are homophones. This spelling variation appears also in the next verse.
I obey Lord despite suffering(50:5–9)[[@Bible:Isa 50:4-8]]
5 According to Eusebius, the absence of resistance and opposition is due to God’s will that the one falsely accused should remain silent (2.37).
6 LEH designates ἐμπτυσμάτων as a neologism. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus advises such a non-retaliative response when struck on the cheek (Matt 5:39): ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλʼ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα σου, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην. Jesus applied this prophecy to himself according to Mark 10:34: καὶ ἐμπαίξουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ μαστιγώσουσιν αὐτὸν. Matt 26:67 presents Jesus behaving according to this prophecy: Τότε ἐνέπτυσαν εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκολάφισαν αὐτόν, οἱ δὲ ἐράπισαν.
7 The image of a stony face was recognized by Eusebius as a symbol of resolve (2.37).
8 After a verb of perception such as ἔγνων, ὅτι is not causal but introduces what is perceived, so there is no question about the interpretation of the first ὅτι.
The meaning of the second ὅτι is less clear. In the absence of a conjunction, the causal sense is likely what was intended: the reason he will not be put to shame is because his defender is coming. Paul alluded to the one who justifies in Rom 8:33: τίς ἐγκαλέσει κατὰ ἐκλεκτῶν θεοῦ; θεὸς ὁ δικαιῶν.
9 Hebrews 1:11 quotes the line about becoming old like a garment, changing the second person verb to the third person: αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις, καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται. 1 Pet 3:13 asks the same rhetorical question about who can harm one who is in the right: Καὶ τίς ὁ κακώσων ὑμᾶς ἐὰν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ζηλωταὶ γένησθε;
Who fears Lord?(50:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 50:10]]
10 The article rarely appears before Κύριος as it does here in the phrase τὸν Κύριον. The third person αὐτοῦ indicates a parenthetical aside between the nominative οἱ πορευόμενοι and its corresponding verb πεποίθατε. The perfect πεποίθατε must be indicative rather than imperative because the perfect imperative is expressed periphrastically.
11 G’s κατισχύω for מאזרי indicates that the conjectural emendation to מאירי is probably incorrect.
I will turn desolation into paradise(51:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 51:1-3]]
1 Paul alluded to pursuing justice in Rom 9:31: Ἰσραὴλ δὲ διώκων νόμον δικαιοσύνης εἰς νόμον οὐκ ἔφθασεν.
2 In addition to reading ארבהו “increase him,” G also read אהבהו “love him.”
3 Instead of ὡς παράδεισον (spelled παράδισον in Q), S and B add the words καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς ὡς παράδεισον; they were deleted by S corrector cb2, whose reading agrees with A (Rahlfs and Ziegler); Ottley has καὶ θήσω τὰ ἔρημα αὐτῆς ὡς παράδεισον, καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς in
angle brackets. The first-hand of Q does not have Κυρίου (along with 198); however, Q’s margins allow for the addition of καὶ τὰ πρὸς δυσμὰς ὡς παράδισον (right margin) and Κυρίου (left); ΠΙΠΙ is given in a separate note on Κυρίου. The vocabulary items εὐφροσύνην καὶ ἀγαλλίαμα amost always occur together.
My justice will spread throughout the world(51:4-6)[[@Bible:Isa 51:4-5]]
4 According to Eusebius, the prophet is no longer addressing Israel but the people that have come from the nations, saved by God’s grace (Eph 2:8) (2.38).
5 Paul alluded to the revealing of righteousness in Rom 1:17: δικαιοσύνη γὰρ θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἀποκαλύπτεται ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν, and in Rom 3:21, Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται μαρτυρουμένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν.
6 Although Ziegler’s best explanation (1934, 157–58), agreeing with Ottley (1904, 1:2:338-339) that G’s translation ἐστερεώθη was the result of working mechanically and not taking the context into account, Peter Katz (1951, 263–64) noted Paul de Lagarde’s explanation that ἐστερεώθη is a corruption of ηρεωθη = ἠραιώθη from ἀραιόομαι “to be rarefied.” The corruption was from reading ΚΑΠΝΟΣΗΡΕΩΘΗ as ΚΑΠΝΟΣ ΟΣΗΡΕΩΘΗ and writing ΚΑΠΝΟΣ ΕΣΤΕΡΕΩΘΗ. The position of the adverb κάτω indicates that it is modifying the noun γῆν rather than the verb ἐμβλέψατε. Like God’s salvation here, Mark 13:31 claims that Jesus’ words are more permanent than heaven and earth. Hebrews 1:1 quotes Isaiah, changing the singular verb to a plural: αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις, καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται.
My salvation is forever(51:7-8)[[@Bible:Isa 51:7-8]]
7 Matt 5:11 uses the vocabulary of reproach: μακάριοί ἐστε ὅταν ὀνειδίσωσιν ὑμᾶς καὶ διώξωσιν καὶ εἴπωσιν πᾶν πονηρὸν καθʼ ὑμῶν ψευδόμενοι ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ. Rom 2:15 alludes to those who have the law in their hearts: οἵτινες ἐνδείκνυνται τὸ ἔργον τοῦ νόμου γραπτὸν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν, συμμαρτυρούσης αὐτῶν τῆς συνειδήσεως καὶ μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων τῶν λογισμῶν κατηγορούντων ἢ καὶ ἀπολογουμένων.
8 The English translation of ὡς as “while” and δέ as “however” conveys more than the lexical value of these Greek words; this translation conveys the contrast produced by the combination of ὡς and δέ. According to Matt 6:19, Jesus refers to moths eating: Μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅπου σὴς καὶ βρῶσις ἀφανίζει καὶ ὅπου κλέπται διορύσσουσιν καὶ κλέπτουσιν. Paul refers to the righteousness of God in Rom 1:17 (δικαιοσύνη γὰρ θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ἀποκαλύπτεται ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν) and Rom 3:21 (Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ πεφανέρωται μαρτυρουμένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν). James 5:2 refers to moth-eaten clothing: ὁ πλοῦτος ὑμῶν σέσηπεν καὶ τὰ ἱμάτια ὑμῶν σητόβρωτα γέγονεν.
Awake, Jerusalem!(51:9)[[@Bible:Isa 51:9-11]]
9 The news of God’s ransoming initiative is enthusiastically presented with a series of imperatives to awake. The “arm” according to G belongs to Jerusalem, a name which (as Eusebius noted) does not appear in the Hebrew or other Greek translations (2.39), likely due to G’s aversion to anthropomorphism. The first-hand of Q divided ἐν between lines rather than using his more common method of omitting nu as the ultimate letter of a line and marking the penultimate with an overbar; the nu was later deleted and an overbar added to the epsilon in keeping with Q’s standard style.
The ransomed will return with joy(51:9-13)[[@Bible:Isa 51:9-11]]
10 The verb τίθημι is used with a double accusative to indicate a transformation. In this case, the depth is transformed into a path. Rev 16:12 speaks of drying the Euphrates to make a path: Καὶ ὁ ἕκτος ἐξέχεεν τὴν φιάλην αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸν ποταμὸν τὸν μέγαν τὸν Εὐφράτην, καὶ ἐξηράνθη τὸ ὕδωρ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἑτοιμασθῇ ἡ ὁδὸς τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς ἡλίου.
11 Instead of γὰρ τῆς κεφαλῆς (the reading also of A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has τῆς κεφαλῆς γὰρ; B has κεφαλῆς γὰρ; Q’s reading is probably the result of smoothing. The genitive adjective αἰωνίου matches the case of ἀγαλλιάματος and also εὐφροσύνης, since αἰωνίου has the same form for masculine and feminine genders. Both ἀγαλλίαμα and ἀγαλλίασις appear here; this is the only instance of ἀγαλλίασις in Isaiah. LEH designates both nouns as neologisms; they are exclusively biblical terms and carry the same meaning. Although Rev 21:4 shares no significant vocabulary, it clearly alludes to the ending of sorrow: καὶ ἐξαλείψει πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν.
12 The syntax of γνῶθι τίνα εὐλαβηθεῖσα ἐφοβήθης is unusual. Eusebius has γνῶθι τίς οὖσα ἐφοβήθης, the reading of B. Rahlfs and Ziegler follow the reading of Q, S corrector cb2 and A; this reading is the same as S except that S (and Q’s corrector) adds σύ after γνῶθι. Ottley said εὐλαβηθεῖσα must be an intrusion from 57:11, and τίνα might have come from the Hebrew, reading את־מי instead of מי־את. Nevertheless, the grammar of S (and Q’s corrector) is unambiguous: the nominative σύ refer to the addressee of the imperative. The accusative τίνα is the object of the main clause’s verb γνῶθι “know” and introduces the subordinate clause as its object as well. The nominative εὐλαβηθεῖσα “wary” refers to the addressee as well, describing the agent of the second person verb ἐφοβήθης: the addressee is advised to know the mortal of whom she was wary and feared.
Lord Sabaoth will not delay when saving you(51:13–14)[[@Bible:Isa 51:12-13]]
13 The meaning of ὃν τρόπον is normally the manner in which something takes place, typically in a comparison which we would express in English using “just as,” which is how Silva handled it. Ottley translated, “(it was) as (though).” Eusebius is no help, since he avoided this phrase and simply identified the oppressor with the one wanting to kill by placing them in apposition: τοῦ θλίβοντός σε, τοῦ βουλευσαμένου ἐξᾶραί σε.
14 The word σῴζεσθαί is spelled σώζεσθαί by Ottley and Swete.
Lord Sabaoth will shelter you from your oppressor(51:15-16)[[@Bible:Isa 51:13-16]]
15 Although Ottley suggested that the Hebrew behind ὁ ταράσσων might mean “that calmeth,” Eusebius did not mention any such interpretation in the other versions (2.39).
16 The verb θεμελιόω is used in Isaiah only in 14:32, 44:28; 48:13, and twice in this chapter: 51:13 and 16.
Jerusalem, you have suffered my wrath(51:17-23)[[@Bible:Isa 51:17-20]]
17 The two accusatives τὸ ποτήριον and τὸ κόνδυ are in apposition, both modified by a genitive noun, and together both are the objects of the two verbs ἐξέπιες and ἐξεκένωσας. According to Matt 26:39, Jesus asked that “this cup” be removed from him, as something to be dreaded: πάτερ μου, εἰ δυνατόν ἐστιν, παρελθάτω ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο. Rev 14:10 also alludes to drinking the cup of God’s wrath: καὶ αὐτὸς πίεται ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ κεκερασμένου ἀκράτου ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ βασανισθήσεται ἐν πυρὶ καὶ θείῳ ἐνώπιον ἀγγέλων ἁγίων καὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ ἀρνίου.
18 Instead of מנהל “guiding,” G read מנחם “comforting.”
19 Swete spelled συλλυπηθήσεται as συνλυπηθήσεται.
20 The expression ὡς σευτλίον ἡμίεφθον “like a half-cooked corn-rent,” is puzzling. The meaning of the Hebrew כתו מיכמר (1QIsaa) or כתוא מכמר (MT) is obscure. Ottley presented Burkitt’s suggestion that G read כתאמכמר as כתאמך מר, which would mean “bitter herb” (1904, 1:2:231). Eusebius noted that instead of ὡς σευτλίον ἡμίεφθον other translations read ὡς ὄρυξ ἠμφιβληστρευμένος or συνειλημμένος, and explained that ὄρυξ was a kind of bird (2.40).
21 The phrase οὐκ ἀπὸ οἴνου recalls 29:9 and 28:1.
22 The dreaded cup, as previously noted, appears in Matt 26:39 as τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο and Rev 14:10 as ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ.
23 The adjective ἴσος prototypically indicates equality and sameness, but in reference to land it means the terrain is level or flat, as in Xenophon, Anabasis 4.6.18.
Get up, Jerusalem!(52:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 52:1-2]]
1 Jerusalem is called the holy city in Matt 4:5 (Τότε παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ), and Rev 21:2 (καὶ τὴν πόλιν τὴν ἁγίαν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καινὴν εἶδον καταβαίνουσαν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ
ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡτοιμασμένην ὡς νύμφην κεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς). Later in the same chapter (Rev 21:27), Revelation alludes to the image of nothing impure entering this city: καὶ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν καὶ [ὁ] ποιῶν βδέλυγμα καὶ ψεῦδος.
2 This holy city of Jerusalem is called to rise up. Ottley pointed out that the reading ἔκδυσαι (the reading of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is likely a misreading of the visually similar ΕΚΛΥΣΑΙ, as B has it; Q reads ἔνδυσαι.
Lord’s people were taken by force(52:3–5)[[@Bible:Isa 52:4-6]]
4 I suspect βίᾳ was selected for its intial sound, which is similar to באפס. Isaiah is the book from the Hebrew Bible that uses βία the most (5 times); the other instances are in 17:13; 28:2; 30:30; 63:1, all in the dative. According to Eusebius, this “force” was on the part of the Egyptians and later the Assyrians, and he noted the other translators had “for nothing” or “for no reason” instead (2.40).
5 The second person plural ἐστε is the reading also of S and B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler; A instead has the third person singular ἔσται, which could be simply a spelling variation, since the two are homophones.
Lord’s name is blasphemed on your account(52:5)[[@Bible:Isa 52:4-6]]
5 Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; however, it was Q’s corrector who deleted the mu from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11; from ἀντιλημψόμενος, 59:16. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, here in 52:5; A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the standard ἐλήμφθη; S has ἐλήμφη (though the transcription on codexsinaiticus.org adds the theta to read ἐλήμφθη). The phrase διὰ παντός is a spatial phrase referring to everywhere. Paul cited this verse, saying God’s name is blasphemed among the nations because of his readers (Rom 2:24): τὸ γὰρ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ διʼ ὑμᾶς βλασφημεῖται ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, καθὼς γέγραπται. Similarly, 1 Timothy 6:1 refers to blasphemy against God’s name and the teaching: Ὅσοι εἰσὶν ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δοῦλοι, τοὺς ἰδίους δεσπότας πάσης τιμῆς ἀξίους ἡγείσθωσαν, ἵνα μὴ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία βλασφημῆται. When 2 Pet 2:2 mentions blaspheming, the connection to Isaiah is less explicit: καὶ πολλοὶ ἐξακολουθήσουσιν αὐτῶν ταῖς ἀσελγείαις διʼ οὓς ἡ ὁδὸς τῆς ἀληθείας βλασφημηθήσεται. Revelation 16:9 alludes to the blasphemy against God’s name: καὶ ἐκαυματίσθησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι καῦμα μέγα καὶ ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἔχοντος τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ τὰς πληγὰς ταύτας.
I announce good news(52:6-10)[[@Bible:Isa 52:6-7]]
6 αὐτός is not exclusively a third person pronoun; since it is nominative here it emphasizes the subject, even though the verb is in the first person, hence the translation “I myself.” Where Q has τὸν Κύριον, the older manuscripts (S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have τὸ ὄνομά μου; Q’s margin contains τὸ ὄνομά μου as an alternate reading above a transliteration of the tetragrammaton.
7 The phrase βασιλεύσει σου ὁ θεός uses a verb cognate to “king,” so one could alternatively translate, “God will be your king.” The feet of one bringing good news are alluded to in Rom 10:15 (ὡς ὡραῖοι οἱ πόδες τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων τὰ ἀγαθά) and Eph 6:15 (καὶ ὑποδησάμενοι τοὺς πόδας ἐν ἑτοιμασίᾳ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς εἰρήνης), and the good news of peace is also alluded to in Acts 10:36 (τὸν λόγον ὃν ἀπέστειλεν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ εὐαγγελιζόμενος εἰρήνην διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὗτός ἐστιν πάντων κύριος) and Eph 2:17 (καὶ ἐλθὼν εὐηγγελίσατο εἰρήνην ὑμῖν τοῖς μακρὰν καὶ εἰρήνην τοῖς ἐγγύς).
8 Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐλεήσῃ; the spelling of S ἐλεήσει was confirmed by corrector cb3, indicating his role was to darken faint lettering.
9 The merciful rescue of Jerusalem is mentioned in the story of Simeon in Luke 2:25-38, but with no verbal borrowing from Isaiah.
10 God is expected to make his saving power evident to all peoples. Eusebius identified that “holy arm” with “God the Word” (τὸν γὰρ βραχίονα τὸν ἅγιον αὐτοῦ, αὐτὸς δὲ ἦν ὁ θεὸς λόγος, 2.41). The
revealing denoted by ἀποκαλύπτω indicates that something is made evident. This visibility is physical only in Isa 47:2, where a veil is removed; in Isa 53:1 it is in parallel with being believed; and in Isa 56:1 in parallel with approaching (here too it is salvation). The noun βραχίων is physical only in Isa 9:20; 15:2; 40:11; 44:12; elsewhere in Isaiah βραχίων refers to strength. So the revealing of the arm is not likely intended to evoke rolling up one’s sleeve.
Come out, carriers of Lord’s vessels!(52:11-12)[[@Bible:Isa 52:11-12]]
11 The departure from their midst is quoted in 2 Cor 6:17 (Διὸ ἐξέλθατε ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ ἀφορίσθητε, λέγει κύριος) and alluded to in Rev 18:4 (ἐξέλθατε ὁ λαός μου ἐξ αὐτῆς).
12 According to Eusebius, those sent out were the apostles, who went to the nations not because they were driven out but because they were eager to make disciples (2.41).
Kings will shut their mouth because of my child(52:13-15)[[@Bible:Isa 52:13-15]]
13 The “lifting up” of the Son of Man is mentioned in John 3:14: Καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. The glorification of God’s servant is alluded to in Acts 3:13: ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν, ἐδόξασεν τὸν παῖδα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. Craig Evans has argued that Jesus’ rejection is explained in John 12:36-41 by identifying Jesus as the Servant of the Lord of Isaiah 52-53 (Evans 1987).
14 Three indicators make reading the neuter τὸ εἶδος as nominative rather than accusative preferable: (a) ἀδοξήσει is normally intransitive, and therefore typically has a subject but not an object; (b) τὸ εἶδός σου is in parallel with the nominative ἡ δόξα σου; (c) the prepositional phrase ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων fits better if it indicates the group doing the despising (“your appearance will be held in contempt by humans”) than if a subject (ὁ παῖς) is imported from earlier in the paragraph (“my servant will hold your appearance in contempt from humans”).
15 Paul quoted οἷς οὐκ ἀνηγγέλη περὶ αὐτοῦ ὄψονται, καὶ οἳ οὐκ ἀκηκόασιν συνήσουσιν verbatim in Rom 15:21. He also mentioned what eyes have not seen and ears not heard in 1 Cor 2:9 (ἀλλὰ καθὼς γέγραπται· ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν
καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν), citing as scripture words that are closer to Isa 64:4. Matt 13:16 also uses the image of eyes seeing and ears hearing, but the verbal parallels are weak (ὑμῶν δὲ μακάριοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὅτι βλέπουσιν καὶ τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν ὅτι ἀκούουσιν).
His appearance was dishonoured(53:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 53:1-3]]
1 The spelling of ἀπεκαλύφθη (as it is in Q, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler and John) was changed by S corrector ca from ἀπεκαλύφη. Luke 24:25 alludes to the resistance to the prophet’s message: ὦ ἀνόητοι καὶ βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῦ πιστεύειν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν οἷς ἐλάλησαν οἱ προφῆται. John 12:38 has a verbatim citation τίς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; καὶ ὁ βραχίων κυρίου τίνι ἀπεκαλύφθη; Paul cited this prophecy in Rom 10:16: Ἀλλʼ οὐ πάντες ὑπήκουσαν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ. Ἠσαΐας γὰρ λέγει· κύριε, τίς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν;
2 The reading ἀνηγγείλαμεν “we proclaimed” is shared with S, A, and B and followed by Rahlfs; instead Ziegler has ἀνέτειλε μὲν “he rose.” The spelling of ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ ὡς παιδίον (the reading of Q, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) was changed by S corrector cb3 from the homophone πεδίον “plain;” B has ὡς παιδίον ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ. The dative in οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτῷ εἶδος reflects the Hebrew לו; this is not necessarily a semiticism, since the dative of possession (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.5.1) is a feature of Greek as well (BDF sec. 188). Instead of εἴδομεν (the spelling also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), Q’s corrector and A spell the word ἴδομεν.
36
3 The phrase ἄνθρωπος ἐν πληγῇ ὢν denotes that the person is stricken. Mark 9:12 alludes to the suffering mentioned in this prophecy: καὶ πῶς γέγραπται ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἵνα πολλὰ πάθῃ καὶ ἐξουδενηθῇ. Human appearance is alluded to in Phil 2:7: ἀλλʼ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος· καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος.
4 The image of bearing sins is referenced three times in the New Testament. Matt 8:17 has Αὐτὸς τὰς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν ἔλαβεν καὶ τὰς νόσους ἐβάστασεν. 1 Pet 2:24 has τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν, conflating with 53:12. 1 John 3:5 has καὶ οἴδατε ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη, ἵνα τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, καὶ ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν.
5 Instead of παιδία, “childhood” (which is also the reading of S, A, and B), Q’s corrector and Rahlfs and Ziegler have the homophone παιδεία, “instruction.” Paul in Rom 4:25 credited “our sins” as the reason for his betrayal: ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν, and in Rom 5:1 he connected this justification with peace: Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. In 1 Cor 15:3 Paul connected Christ’s death with this prophecy: Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφάς. According to Barnabas (5.2), this Scripture relates partly to Israel and partly to “us.” Eusebius (Comm. Isa. 2.42) interpreted this to mean that the suffering and discipline that should have fallen on us “fell on him for our peace with God.” Athanasius wrote that the suffering was not for his sake but for “the immortality and salvation of all” (Inc. 34.2; cf. 36.4). According to Justin Martyr, the stripes heal those who approach the Father by Him (Dial. 17.1; 137.1); further, the “Father of all” wanted his anointed to take upon himself the curses of the whole human family (Dial. 95.3).
6 Quoting πάντες ὡς πρόβατα ἐπλανήθημεν, 1 Pet 2:25 has ἦτε γὰρ ὡς πρόβατα πλανώμενοι.
Though innocent, he was killed(53:7-12)[[@Bible:Isa 53:7-10]]
7 According to Matt 27:12; Mark 14:61, Jesus remained silent during his interrogation. In Acts 8:32, this is the passage the eunuch asks Philip about, quoting it verbatim: ἡ δὲ περιοχὴ τῆς γραφῆς ἣν ἀνεγίνωσκεν ἦν αὕτη· ὡς πρόβατον ἐπὶ σφαγὴν ἤχθη καὶ ὡς ἀμνὸς ἐναντίον τοῦ κείραντος αὐτὸν ἄφωνος, οὕτως οὐκ ἀνοίγει τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ. He is called a sin-removing lamb in John 1:29 (ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου), and compared to a slaughtered lamb in Rev 5:6 (ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς ὡς ἐσφαγμένον); the slaughtering is mentioned again a few verses later in Rev 5:9: ἐσφάγης καὶ ἠγόρασας τῷ θεῷ ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς καὶ γλώσσης καὶ λαοῦ καὶ ἔθνους.
8 The prototypical meaning of τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται; would be “who will explain his family?” Eusebius described these words as referring to his birth: ἐπὶ τὴν τῆς γενέσεως αὐτοῦ φαντασίαν (2.42). The proposition ἀπό governing τῶν ἀνομιῶν τοῦ λαοῦ μου indicates not the location from which but the reason they were led (ἤχθη εἰς θάνατον).
9 The reading of S δόλον (shared with B and corresponding to the MT), was changed by corrector ca to εὑρέθη δόλος (which is the reading of Q, A, and followed by Rahlfs, Ziegler, and 1 Peter). Hatch (1889, 4.202) considered the original reading to be οὐδὲ δόλος; Ottley suggested δόλον was altered to match ἀνομίαν, and that A was very early harmonized to the NT. But because εὑρέθη is found in both 1 Peter and Revelation, it is unlikely that this is an insertion, since both would have had to make the same insertion independently. 1 Pet 2:22 has ὃς ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ. Rev 14:5 has καὶ ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτῶν οὐχ εὑρέθη ψεῦδος.
10 Matt 20:28 and Mark 10:45 allude to giving one’s soul to benefit others. Both read ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθεν διακονηθῆναι ἀλλὰ διακονῆσαι καὶ δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν.
11 Paul alluded to the justification of the many in Rom 5:19: διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.
12 1 Pet 2:24 conflates 53:12 with 53:4: ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν. That those who benefit from Jesus’ work are many is mentioned in Mark 14:24 (τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης τὸ ἐκχυννόμενον ὑπὲρ πολλῶν) and Rom 5:15, (ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ δωρεὰ ἐν χάριτι τῇ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐπερίσσευσεν). In 1 John 3:5, the taking away of sins is mentioned: ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη, ἵνα τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, καὶ ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν. In the New Testament, the “strong man” is mentioned in Matt 12:29 (ἢ πῶς δύναταί τις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ καὶ τὰ σκεύη αὐτοῦ ἁρπάσαι, ἐὰν μὴ πρῶτον
δήσῃ τὸν ἰσχυρόν😉 and Luke 11:22 (ἐπὰν δὲ ἰσχυρότερος αὐτοῦ ἐπελθὼν νικήσῃ αὐτόν, τὴν πανοπλίαν αὐτοῦ αἴρει ἐφʼ ᾗ ἐπεποίθει καὶ τὰ σκῦλα αὐτοῦ διαδίδωσιν). According to Mark 15:27 and Matt 27:38, Jesus was among lawbreakers at his death, but in these two gospels the allusion is made without verbal borrowing, whereas Luke 22:37 (with MT) makes the connection to Isaiah explicit: τοῦτο τὸ γεγραμμένον δεῖ τελεσθῆναι ἐν ἐμοί, τό· καὶ μετὰ ἀνόμων ἐλογίσθη. Luke 23:34 mentions dividing his clothes: διαμεριζόμενοι δὲ τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ ἔβαλον κλήρους. Paul drew on this scripture when in 1 Cor 15:3 he wrote that Christ died for our sins: Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς. The verbal parallel is even closer in Hebrews 9:28: ὁ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς εἰς τὸ πολλῶν ἀνενεγκεῖν ἁμαρτίας. 1 Pet 2:24 has ὃς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, ἵνα ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἀπογενόμενοι τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσωμεν, οὗ τῷ μώλωπι ἰάθητε.
The widow will have plenty of children(54:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 54:1-3]]
1 The phrase στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα is in the vocative case. The aorist imperative ῥῆξον is from ῥήγνυμι, “break out.” The feminine participle ὠδίνουσα is from ὠδίνω, “have birth-pangs.” The adjective ἐρήμου here is feminine, and although this adjective normally describes land (a deserted land is a desert), here it refers to a deserted woman. In the verbless clause ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου μᾶλλον, the adverb μᾶλλον is displaced far from the πολλά that it modifies. Gal 4:27 cites this prophecy verbatim: Εὐφράνθητι, στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα, ῥῆξον καὶ βόησον, ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσα· ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα. Luke 23:29 alludes to the reversal of barrenness: ἔρχονται ἡμέραι ἐν αἷς ἐροῦσιν· μακάριαι αἱ στεῖραι καὶ αἱ κοιλίαι αἳ οὐκ ἐγέννησαν καὶ μαστοὶ οἳ οὐκ ἔθρεψαν.
2 The vocabulary recalls Exod 38:21. The imperative πλάτυνον is an aorist form πλατύνω, “broaden.” In the singular form, αὐλαία usually refers to a curtain, but in the plural it is used for screens; in Judith the singular is used for the place Bagoas knocked so as not to interrupt Holofernes inside the tent. The imperative πῆξον is an aorist form of πήγνυμι, “fix in place.” The μή preceding φείσῃ indicates this is not future indicative but aorist subjunctive of φείδομαι, “refrain;” however compare μνησθήσῃ in 54:4. The σχοινίσματα are allotments of land. A πάσσαλος is a peg; in the LXX this noun is used for the tabernacle, but LSJ also cites Inscriptiones Graecae 14 #352 i 38 where it is used to mark boundaries.
3 Instead of ἔτι (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has ὅτι, supported only by 538 and MT כי. The form ἐκπέτασον is from ἐκπετάννυμι, “spread out.” The first-hands of both Q and S read the singular πόλις; this reading was changed by Q’s corrector and S corrector cb3 to the plural spelling πόλεις, which is what A and B have, followed by
Rahlfs and Ziegler; it is evidently just a spelling variation since the matching participle is plural; the Hebrew is also the plural ערים. The future κατοικιεῖς (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) is from κατοικίζω (A has κατοικήσεις, from κατοικέω). The verb κατοικίζω is the causative form of κατοικέω, with an object that is sometimes personal and sometimes local. When local, it refers to settling and colonizing.
You will not remember the reproach of your widowhood(54:4-11)[[@Bible:Isa 54:4-6]]
4 The form κατῃσχύνθης is the aorist passive of καταισχύνω, “disgrace,” and ἐντραπῇς is from ἐντρέπω, “defer.” The aorist passive ὠνειδίσθης is from ὀνειδίζω, and ἐπιλήσῃ is the future middle of ἐπιλανθάνομαι, “forget.” With the negator οὐ μή, a subjunctive might be expected in place of μνησθήσῃ, but instead we have the future indicative of μιμνῄσκομαι.
5 Instead of αὐτός ( the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured ἅγιος with the sole support of the MT. The subject of κληθήσεται is unclear in most manuscripts; Ottley took the earlier part of this verse as two verbless clauses, Brenton and Silva as three. The other option is to take Κύριος the subject, as Eusebius interpreted this section: “The Lord has not called you as a forsaken and faint-hearted woman” (Comm. Isa. 2.43), evidently not reading a paragraph break in the middle of verse 6. He commented, “he who was once God of Israel alone is now known in all the earth” (2.43).
6 The form καταλελειμμένην is in Q spelled καταλελιμμένην, as in S and the first-hand of B (followed by Swete). Note the accusative form, corresponding to σε.
7 The past time of disfavour was short compared to the coming time of favour. The accusatives χρόνον μικρόν are used adverbially. Swete spelled μετά as μετʼ.
8 Rahlfs and Ziegler differ regarding the reading ἠλέησά.
9 The dative τῇ γῇ could attach to either ὤμοσα or θυμωθήσεσθαι. The passive of θυμόω (as in the future infinitive θυμωθήσεσθαι) is commonly used for becoming angry, with the object of the anger in the dative. Future infinitives convey purpose. The future infinitive emphasizes that the time referred to is later than that of the main verb (Smyth 1956, sec. 1865.d) (also in the next verse). Ottley and Silva interpreted ἐπὶ σοὶ as the cause of the anger, Brenton as the object of the anger. An ἀπειλή is a threat. The phrase ἐν ἀπειλῇ σου was understood by Ottley and Silva as the purpose for moving the mountains (which in S are boundaries).
10 The reading μεταστήσασθαι (the reading also of S corrector cb3, A, and followed by Ziegler) was changed by Q’s corrector to μεταστήσεσθαι, the reading of B (followed by Rahlfs); the first-hand of S wrote μεταστήσασθε. Instead of οὐδέ (as spelled also by A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has οὐδʼ. The subjunctive μεταστῇ is an aorist of μεθίστημι, “remove.” Instead of Κύριος Ἵλεώς σοι (the reading also of S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has Ἵλεώς σοι, Κύριε. The adjective ἵλεως is masculine nominative, but indefinite, so it could modify Κύριος predicatively (rather than attributively). Ottley translated, “for he said, The Lord is gracious to thee.” Silva translated, “the Lord said he would be merciful to you.” The adjective Ἵλεώς is the Attic form of ἵλαος, and refers to a favourable disposition. The idiom Ἵλεώς σοι carries an implicit ὁ θεὸς εἴη; it is a wish that God have mercy on you (Genesis 43:23), but see also (Joosten 2007). It is used in Matt 16:12 in a context which in English might be expressed by “God forbid!”
11 The redundant pronoun ἐγώ provides emphasis to the subject. The verb ἑτοιμάζω has two accusatives; normally in such cases the more definite is the direct object, and the less definite is the complement, so “preparing your stone as a coal” and “your foundations as sapphire.” Eusebius confirmed this with his paraphrases, ἄνθρακα λίθον τίμιον ἑτοιμάσει αὐτῇ, and τὰ δὲ θεμέλιά σου ἀπὸ λίθου
σαπφείρου συνθήσω, since the preposition before the stone indicates that the foundations are the direct object. Rev 21:19 alludes to the foundations of precious stones, particularly lapis lazuli: οἱ θεμέλιοι τοῦ τείχους τῆς πόλεως παντὶ λίθῳ τιμίῳ κεκοσμημένοι· ὁ θεμέλιος ὁ πρῶτος ἴασπις, ὁ δεύτερος σάπφιρος, ὁ τρίτος χαλκηδών, ὁ τέταρτος σμάραγδος.
You will be built up in righteousness(54:11-15)[[@Bible:Isa 54:11-14]]
11 The noun ἄνθραξ is used to refer to both charcoal and red precious stones such as rubies and carbuncles. Eusebius understood the former sense, connecting it with the coal used to purify the prophet’s lips in 6:6. σαπφείρος is lapis lazuli (see Exodus 24:10). Eusebius said this is the colour of the sky.
12 The stone ἴασπις is specifically jasper but can refer to any opaque precious stone (BDAG). The noun κρύσταλλος normally refers to ice or rock-crystal. Eusebius associated it with radiance and purity.
13 John 6:45 cites the expression πάντας τοὺς υἱούς σου διδακτοὺς θεοῦ as Καὶ ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ θεοῦ. The accusatives are objects of θήσω.
14 The second person verb οἰκοδομηθήσῃ is a future passive indicative. The imperative ἀπέχου is from ἀπέχω; the contextual sense here is to be distant. Tremors (τρόμος) often appear in parallel with φόβος. The form ἐγγιεῖ is a future of ἐγγίζω.
15 The noun προσήλυτοι translates the Hebrew noun גר, and the verb προσελεύσονταί translates the verb יגור. Philo Spec. 1, 51 also used this etymology: τούτους δὲ καλεῖ προσηλύτους ἀπὸ τοῦ προσεληλυθέναι καινῇ καὶ φιλοθέῳ πολιτείᾳ. The preposition ἐπί with καταφεύγω refers to that in which one takes refuge.
You will overcome your opponents(54:16-17)[[@Bible:Isa 54:14-17]]
16 The reading κτίζω agrees with S, A, 965, and Rahlfs and Ziegler; B has ἔκτισα. MT has בראתי, so one would expect an aorist here. The verb φυσάω is used for blowing air. The prepositional phrase εἰς ἔργον indicates the vessel has a purpose, a job to do. Eusebius took φθεῖραι with what follows rather than with what precedes. Paul alluded to the vessels for destruction in Rom 9:22: εἰ δὲ θέλων ὁ θεὸς ἐνδείξασθαι τὴν ὀργὴν καὶ γνωρίσαι τὸ δυνατὸν αὐτοῦ ἤνεγκεν ἐν πολλῇ μακροθυμίᾳ σκεύη ὀργῆς κατηρτισμένα εἰς ἀπώλειαν.17 Instead of εὐοδώσω “succeed” (with S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has εὐδοκήσω “be well pleased.” The noun ἔνοχος with the genitive is used for those subject to someone. Instead of αὐτῇ (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has λύπῃ, supported by only a few 10th-12th century manuscripts, the Syrohexaplaric marginalia, and Theodoret. The referent of this pronoun is unclear; it could be φωνή or κρίσις. Eusebius noted that this phrase is not in the Hebrew or other Greek translations. Brenton translated it “thereby,” implying the process of vanquishing. Ottley translated, “they that are subject to thee shall be therein.” The subject of ἐστιν could be the referent of αὐτῇ.An inheritance for Lord’s servants(54:17)[[@Bible:Isa 55:1-2]]
17 G primarily used the nouns δοῦλος or παῖς to translate עבד in Isaiah, but here used the participle θεραπεύουσιν.
Buy food and drink with no money(55:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 55:1-2]]
1 The combination of πορεύω with ἐπί is not uncommon; it is used, for example, in Matt 22:9: πορεύεσθε οὖν ἐπὶ τὰς διεξόδους τῶν ὁδῶν. Where the first-hand of Q has the infinitive πορεύεσθαι (the reading also of S), Q’s corrector opted to erase the iota and overwrite the alpha with an epsilon for the imperative πορεύεσθε (the reading of A, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The Hebrew preposition here is ל. The partitive genitive οἴνου indicates drinking some of the wine. The fat (στέαρ) is in the accusative case, whereas οἴνου was genitive; the Hebrew is חלב, “milk.” According to John 7:37, Jesus issued a similar invitation to the thirsty: ἐάν τις διψᾷ ἐρχέσθω πρός με καὶ πινέτω. Also in Rev 3:18 we find God inviting people to buy from him: συμβουλεύω σοι ἀγοράσαι παρʼ ἐμοῦ χρυσίον πεπυρωμένον ἐκ πυρὸς ἵνα πλουτήσῃς. In Revelation 21:6, God again offers to give water to the thirsty: ἐγὼ τῷ διψῶντι δώσω ἐκ τῆς πηγῆς τοῦ ὕδατος τῆς ζωῆς δωρεάν, and the invitation is repeated in Rev 22:17: καὶ ὁ διψῶν ἐρχέσθω, ὁ θέλων λαβέτω ὕδωρ ζωῆς δωρεάν.
2 The noun μόχθος denotes exertion. The two clauses ἵνα τί τιμᾶσθε ἀργυρίου and τὸν μόχθον ὑμῶν οὐκ εἰς πλησμονήν are connected by καί, which is a coordinating rather than subordinating conjunction. The formal equivalent would be “Why do you value silver and your labour does not bring satisfaction?” Both clauses are part of a rhetorical question, which we would render in English with a subordinate clause instead of the coordinated clauses we see in Greek.
The verb ἐντρυφάω connotes self-indulgence. Note the singular noun ἡ ψυχὴ and plural pronoun ὑμῶν, which match the Hebrew נפשׁכם.
3 The reading ἐισακολουθήσατε was changed in S by corrector cb2 to ἐπακολουθήσατε “follow,” matching Q, A, and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
Nations will call upon you(55:3-5)[[@Bible:Isa 55:1-2]]
3 The pair διαθήσομαι … διαθήκην is cognate in Greek, but the Hebrew has ואכרת … ברית. In the phrase τὰ ὅσια Δαυὶδ τὰ πιστά, the attributive adjective must be πιστά and the substantive must be ὅσια (rather than “the holy faithful things”), since this syntax matches the “article-substantive-article-adjective” order Porter called “Position 2” (Porter 1992, sec. 6.1.1). David is in the middle because that is the Hebrew word order. Acts 13:34 cites this prophecy as Δώσω ὑμῖν τὰ ὅσια Δαυὶδ τὰ πιστά. Hebrews 13:20 mentions the eternal covenant: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν.
4 In Revelation 1:5 the witness who is a global ruler appears: καὶ ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός, ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς. Τῷ ἀγαπῶντι ἡμᾶς καὶ λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ.
Seek God and call upon him(55:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 55:6-9]]
6 The exhortation to seek God while he may be found is made in Acts 17:27: ζητεῖν τὸν θεόν, εἰ ἄρα γε ψηλαφήσειαν αὐτὸν καὶ εὕροιεν, καί γε οὐ μακρὰν ἀπὸ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου ἡμῶν ὑπάρχοντα.
7 Forgiveness of sins is attributed to God alone in Luke 5:21: καὶ ἤρξαντο διαλογίζεσθαι οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι λέγοντες· τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὃς λαλεῖ βλασφημίας; τίς δύναται ἁμαρτίας ἀφεῖναι εἰ μὴ μόνος ὁ θεός;
My ways are not like your ways(55:8-9)[[@Bible:Isa 55:6-9]]
9 The change in sound is slight between the pair “your” διανοήματα and “my” διανοίας, a fact that is obscured by translating the latter as “mind;” perhaps “thinking” would convey the cognate better.
My word will accomplish my purpose(55:10-13)[[@Bible:Isa 55:10-13]]
10 2 Cor 9:10 (S) quotes Isa 55:10 as follows: ὁ δὲ ἐπιχορηγῶν σπέρμα τῷ σπείροντι καὶ ἄρτον εἰς βρῶσιν, although B has σπορον for σπέρμα.
12 Instead of διδαχθήσεσθε (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has διαχθήσεσθε, on the basis of only 22c-93, 377-564-565, 198, the Coptic, and Jerome. The participle προσδεχόμενοι presents the welcoming as a concurrent circumstance to the leaping (Porter 1992, sec. 10.4.1).
13 Instead of Κύριος (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler has κυρίῳ, on the basis of only 62-90-130-311, 544, and Theodoret.
Preserve justice(56:1)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
1 The imperative Φυλάσσεσθε is present, although the parallel ποιήσατε is aorist. The Hebrew imperative does not distinguish aspects. Instead of the aorist ἤγγισεν (the reading also of A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S and B have the perfect ἤγγικεν. The infinitive παραγίνεσθαι matches the Hebrew לבוא. The infinitive ἀποκαλυφθῆναι is a literal rendering of the Hebrew infinitive להגלות. Revelation 22:11 speaks of doing righteousness: ὁ ἀδικῶν ἀδικησάτω ἔτι καὶ ὁ ῥυπαρὸς ῥυπανθήτω ἔτι, καὶ ὁ δίκαιος δικαιοσύνην ποιησάτω ἔτι καὶ ὁ ἅγιος ἁγιασθήτω ἔτι.
Blessed is the man who does these things(56:2)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
2 Both μακάριος and ἀνήρ are anarthous, in contrast to ὁ ποιῶν. The parallel noun ἄνθρωπος is likewise without the article. The Hebrew words are אנושׁ and אדם, respectively. The participle φυλάσσων recalls the Φυλάσσεσθε of the preceding verse. The first-hand of Q has the singular noun ἀδίκημα (the reading also of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); Q’s corrector opted for the plural adjective ἄδικα (the reading of B and 965).
Let the faithful stranger not fear separation(56:3)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
3 The verb πρόσκειμαι normally takes a dative, which is used for close attachment and devotion, specifically to God in Jos. Asen. 15.6 and Sib. Or. 3.574, so the dative Κυρίῳ (the reading of S) is the expected form with πρόσκειμαι; Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have πρὸς Κύριον instead. The preposition πρός matches the Hebrew אל. The form Ἀφοριεῖ is the future of ἀφορίζω, “separate.” Possibly the story of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:27 was intended to recall Isaiah 56:3-7.
Eunuchs will have an eternal legacy(56:4-5)[[@Bible:Isa 56:1-2]]
4 Although τοῖς εὐνούχοις most likely indicates the addressees, alternatively it could be part of Lord’s speech, in which case αὐτοῖς (56:5) would have the same referent. The recurrence of φυλάξωνται recalls 56:1-2. The verb ἀντέχω with the genitive denotes holding a strong attachment.
5 The adjective ὀνομαστός indicates that the place will be well-known, i.e., famous. The Hebrew behind τόπον ὀνομαστόν is יד ושׁם. The sense is that although eunuchs do not have posterity to preserve their name, Lord will provide other ways for them to be remembered.
A house of prayer even for foreigners(56:6-11)[[@Bible:Isa 56:6-8]]
6 There is no new finite verb in this verse, so the dative continues the αὐτοῖς of 56:5. Ottley spelled ἀλλογενέσι as ἀλλογενέσιν. Swete spelled ἀγαπᾶν as ἀγαπᾷν. The recurrence of φυλασσομένους recalls 56:1, 2, and 4. There are three accusatives governed by the preposition εἰς: bondmen and bondwomen and sabbath-keepers; these three are what the God-fearing foreigners become.
7 The future of εὐφραίνω is used, with the accusative indicating the person cheered. The neuter τὰ ὁλοκαυτώματα must be nominative, in parallel with αἱ θυσίαι. See Acts 10:35 for the connection with salvation and δεκταί, doing what is right. Paul mentioned the acceptable sacrifice in Phil 4:18: ἀπέχω δὲ πάντα καὶ περισσεύω· πεπλήρωμαι δεξάμενος παρὰ Ἐπαφροδίτου τὰ παρʼ ὑμῶν, ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, θυσίαν δεκτήν, εὐάρεστον τῷ θεῷ. The passive κληθήσεται has the nominative οἶκος as its subject. Mark 11:17 has the full quote Ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν; Matt 21:13 shortens it to Ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται; Luke 19:46 (S) has the even shorter ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς. The point made in the context of Isaiah, namely that the house of prayer is πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, is lost in Matthew and Luke. Here the eunuchs and foreigners are accepted; in Luke 17:18 it is the leper that is the foreigner; in Acts 8:27 the eunuch.
8 The cognates συνάγων … συνάξω … συναγωγήν match the Hebrew words, which are all from the root קבץ. The use of the preposition ἐπί in συνάξω ἐπʼ αὐτὸν συναγωγήν is similar to that in Mark 5:21, where the crowd gethered “to” Jesus. This preposition is the regular translation of על, which in the Hebrew clearly has a singular pronoun. Eusebius did not comment on this unexpected preposition because he interpreted only the first half of the verse.
9 The neuter τὰ θηρία is probably vocative, but the beasts could be read as accusative. The adjective τὰ ἄγρια, “wild,” might seem redundant when describing τὰ θηρία, “beasts.”
10 The adjective ἐνεός designates those unable to speak. The infinitive ὑλακτεῖν (ὑλακτέω) indicates the sound that dogs make, whether barking, snarling, or howling. The verb ἐνυπνιάζομαι refers to dreaming. The accusative κοίτην indicates the place in which the dreaming is taking place. The verb νυστάζω connotes idleness and inaction.
11 The adjective ἀναιδής usually refers to lack of shame, but Brenton and Ottley both translated it as insatiability, perhaps because ἀναιδής connotes lack of restraint and because of the parallel lack of πλησμονήν, “satiety.” The verb ἐξηκολούθησαν means to follow, especially by imitating behavior. The expression κατὰ τὸ αὐτό means “together,” as in Acts 14:1; 1 Kgdms 11:11.
The righteous has been taken away(57:1-8)[[@Bible:Isa 57:1-2]]
1 Q, A, B, and 965 (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐκδέχεται τῇ καρδίᾳ … κατανοεῖ; S has κατανοεῖ … ἐκδέχεται τῇ καρδίᾳ. In place of κατανοεῖ, S scribe B originally wrote κατανομει, which was changed by cb1 to κατανοεῖ τῇ καρδίᾳ, and by cb3 to κατανοεῖ.
3 James 4:4 too labels his addressees as adulterers: μοιχαλίδες, οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ἔχθρα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν; In 2 Thess 2:3 the son of destruction is mentioned in conjunction with lawlessness: ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας,
5 The combination ἀνὰ μέσον functions as a preposition “between,” that takes a genitive object.
7 The participle ἀναβιβάσας was changed by corrector ca to the indicative ἀνεβίβασας, which is also the reading of Q, A, B and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler. The expression ὑψηλὸν καὶ μετέωρον appears also in 2:12-13; 30:25. The adjective μετέωρον is used for arrogance in 2:12; 5:15.
Your unfaithfulness alienated us(57:8-14)[[@Bible:Isa 57:1-2]]
8 The transitive sense of ἀφίστημι is to move something, but typically in a non-physical sense of getting people to defect.
10 LEH lists πολυοδία as a neologism. There are several ways of interpreting the relationship of the participle ἐνισχύουσα to the finite verb παύσομαι: attendant circumstance (“pause and regain strength”) and purpose (“pause in order to regain strength”) are two of the most obvious. But παύω in the middle with a present participle is a special construction that means to stop doing the action of the participle, such as ἐπαύσατο λαλῶν (Luke 5:4), ἐπαυσάμην ἐρωτῶν (Acts 21:32), ἐπαύσαντο οἰκοδομοῦντες (Genesis 11:8). Because διὰ τοῦτο is at the beginning of the clause, it is simpler to interpret it as a conjunction “therefore,” rather than a prepositional phrase “you did not entreat me because of this.”
11 Ottley, Swete, and Ziegler place σύ at the end of verse 10, and although Rahlfs puts it at the beginning of verse 11, his punctuation makes it part of the preceding sentence. Instead of κἀγώ (the spelling also of Ottley, Rahlfs, and Ziegler), S and B (Swete) spell it καὶ ἐγώ. The participle εὐλαβηθεῖσα expresses a situation antecedent to the main action ἐφοβήθης (Porter 1992, sec. 10.4.1). The
participle ἰδὼν relates the same way to παρορῶ, but in this case there is some opposition of meaning, which makes the participle concessive.
12 Again, Q, Ottley, Rahlfs, and Ziegler have κἀγώ.
13 Koenen noted that ἐν τῆ θλίψει σου indicates that G was translating בקציך rather than קבוציך (Koenen 1989).
The most Holy One will not punish forever(57:15-21)[[@Bible:Isa 57:15-16]]
15 Reminiscent of the crushed in heart are the poor in spirit mentioned in the beatitudes (Matt 5:3): Μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι, ὅτι αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. Paul advocated patience in the context of the discouraged, in 1 Thess 5:14: Παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτους, παραμυθεῖσθε τοὺς ὀλιγοψύχους, ἀντέχεσθε τῶν ἀσθενῶν, μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας. Paul’s speech in Acts 17:25 alludes to God as the giver of life and breath: οὐδὲ ὑπὸ χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων θεραπεύεται προσδεόμενός τινος, αὐτὸς διδοὺς πᾶσιν ζωὴν καὶ πνοὴν καὶ τὰ πάντα.
17 Ottley spelled διʼ as διά. The combination βραχύ τι means “for some short [time/distance],” i.e., “a little bit” or “briefly.” It appears also in Ps 8:6 “he made him lower than the angels for/by a little bit;” 2 Kingdoms 16:1 “a little while/distance.” By the time the reader reaches the nominative στυγνὸς, the subject has already changed from the first person ἀπέστρεψα to the third person ἐλυπήθη. So although “a gloomy person” could function substantively as the subject of ἐλυπήθη and ἐπορεύθη, more likely it is functioning attributively, describing the (already-established) agent of these verbs: “he went away gloomy.”
18 In place of ἑώρακα, Swete has ἑόρακα.
19 The accusatives εἰρήνην ἐπʼ εἰρήνην are objects of ἔδωκα from the preceding verse, along with παράκλησιν. Acts 2:39 mentions those distant who are comforted by God: ὑμῖν γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἐπαγγελία καὶ τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν καὶ πᾶσιν τοῖς εἰς
μακράν, ὅσους ἂν προσκαλέσηται κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν. Ephesians 2:17 quotes Isaiah more directly: καὶ ἐλθὼν εὐηγγελίσατο εἰρήνην ὑμῖν τοῖς μακρὰν καὶ εἰρήνην τοῖς ἐγγύς.
20 Ephesians 4:14 mentions being tossed by waves: ἵνα μηκέτι ὦμεν νήπιοι, κλυδωνιζόμενοι καὶ περιφερόμενοι παντὶ ἀνέμῳ τῆς διδασκαλίας ἐν τῇ κυβείᾳ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἐν πανουργίᾳ πρὸς τὴν μεθοδείαν τῆς πλάνης. The image is also used by Jude 13 but with no verbal parallels.
Proclaim my people’s sins(58:1)[[@Bible:Isa 57:21-58:2]]
1 G uses ἁμάρτημα only three times (always in the plural): in Isa 40:2 (חַטָּאת); 58:1 (פשׁע); 59:2, for a different Hebrew word each time.
Improper fasts(58:2-12)[[@Bible:Isa 58:2-6]]
2 The expression ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας appears in non-biblical Greek for things that happen every day, as for example, “Day by day you make your throw adventuring war against the Argives” in Euripides, Rhesus 445. In biblical Greek it appears first in Genesis 39:10 (Conybeare and Stock 1905, sec. 86c).
3 Matthew 9:14 raised the question of whether fasts are appropriate: Τότε προσέρχονται αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου λέγοντες· διὰ τί ἡμεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι νηστεύομεν πολλά, οἱ δὲ μαθηταί σου οὐ νηστεύουσιν; Both the first-hand of Q and S’s corrector cb3 have the third-person singular, middle/passive εὑρίσκεται; the most recent singular nouns which might be found are κρίσιν and θεῷ; while God might be found by those seeking him improperly, the behavior being addressed is more likely to provoke judgement. By fasting, the addressees sting both their wishes (food) and their subjects; by doing so, they find judgement. Q’s corrector, the first-hand of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the second-person plural, active εὑρίσκετε, having the people find their wishes and sting their subjects.
5 Matthew 6:16 describes some of the self-abasement associated with fasting, and the impropriety of fasts that are outward-only: Ὅταν δὲ νηστεύητε, μὴ γίνεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταὶ σκυθρωποί, ἀφανίζουσιν γὰρ τὰ πρόσωπα αὐτῶν ὅπως φανῶσιν
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις νηστεύοντες· ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. The expression καλέσετε νηστείαν δεκτήν may be alluded to in the addition to the quotation of Isaiah 61 in Luke 4:18-19, which has κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν.
6 The prepositional phrase ἐν ἀφέσει modifies not τεθραυσμένους but ἀπόστελλε. According to Luke 4:18, Jesus quoted this text after reading from Isaiah 61 in the synagogue: πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπʼ ἐμὲ οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέν με, κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει. Acts 8:23 refers to this fetter of injustice: εἰς γὰρ χολὴν πικρίας καὶ σύνδεσμον ἀδικίας ὁρῶ σε ὄντα.
[[@Bible:Isa 58:6-8]]
7 Matthew 25:35 alludes to the treatment of the deprived, specifically feeding the hungry and welcoming the stranger: ἐπείνασα γὰρ καὶ ἐδώκατέ μοι φαγεῖν, ἐδίψησα καὶ ἐποτίσατέ με, ξένος ἤμην καὶ συνηγάγετέ με.
8 Revelation 21:11 alludes to the shining of God’s glory: ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς ὅμοιος λίθῳ τιμιωτάτῳ ὡς λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι κρυσταλλίζοντι.
10 Matthew 4:16 alludes to the light rising in the darkness: ὁ λαὸς ὁ καθήμενος ἐν σκότει φῶς εἶδεν μέγα, καὶ τοῖς καθημένοις ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου φῶς ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς.
11 Instead of the second instance of ἔσται (the reading also of S, A, B, and followed by Ziegler), Rahlfs has ἔσῃ, supported by the Syrohexapla and Lucianic family, and Theodoret, matching MT. The promise of God’s presence is applied to Jesus in Acts 10:38: Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέθ, ὡς ἔχρισεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ δυνάμει, ὃς διῆλθεν εὐεργετῶν καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ. The referent of the feminine singular relative pronoun in πηγὴ ἣν μὴ ἐξέλιπεν ὕδωρ is clearly the spring, but because it is accusative, the subject must be ὕδωρ as a nominative. Normally ἐκλείπω does not take an object, but when it does, it denotes abandonment. Water has not abandoned this spring. Cook identified an intertextual connection with Prov 16:2 (Cook 2010). The spring that never lacks water is alluded to in John 4:14, where Jesus tells the Samaritan woman: ὃς δʼ ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, οὐ μὴ διψήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω αὐτῷ γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴ ὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
12 The adjective αἰώνιοι is nominative because it describes the nominative deserts (αἱ ἔρημοι). Eusebius interpreted the foundations in light of Ephesians 2:20, where the foundations are the apostles and prophets.
Keep the Sabbath holy, and Lord will reward you(58:13-14)[[@Bible:Isa 58:13-14]]
13 The protasis of a third class conditional is provided by the clause beginning ἐὰν ἀποστρέψῃς.
14 It is not clear where the protasis ends and the apodosis begins. Eusebius paraphrased with the turning and calling in the aorist subjunctive, and the lifting, speaking, and trusting in the future indicative, suggesting by the change of tense where the apodosis begins. Q, A, B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the future indicative ἀναβιβάσει which yields better sense (“he will lift you”) than the aorist subjunctive ἀναβιβάσῃ (“he may lift you”) of S.
Your sins divided you and God(59:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 59:1-6]]
2 Where the Hebrew has the sins of the people obscuring God’s face(s) (וחטאותיכם הסתירו פנים מכם, “and your sins have hidden faces from you”), G has God turning his face because of the sins (“he has turned his face away from you … because of your sins”).
All of you are chronic sinners(59:3–9)[[@Bible:Isa 59:6-8]]
3 In the bloody hands, Eusebius (2.47) found reference to the Jewish people’s “uprising against the Savior and their scheme against righteous men,” since they asked for his blood to be on them and on their children (Matt 27:25).
4 In the vanities and empty words Eusebius found reference to Jewish myths expecting another human Christ.
5 Ottley and Swete spelled ᾠὰ and ᾠῶν as ὠὰ and ὠῶν. David Weissert argued that οὔριον is a translation of הזורה, solving the other discrepancies in the translation. This verse provides the origin of the idea that the basilisk is hatched from a rooster’s egg (Weissert 1967).
6 Although ἱστός can refer to the beam of a loom and also the product of weaving, Eusebius assumed it was the product of a spider (ἱστὸν ἀράχνης) mentioned earlier. The article and possessive pronoun in ὁ ἱστὸς αὐτῶν confirm that this is not something introduced for the first time; it is recalling the earlier web. According to Eusebius, this “web” is the set of traditions imposed by humans in Isa 29:13. The statement that their web will not become a garment means their intention will be foiled. Even though δέ is inserted between οὐ and μή, the construction here retains the emphatic force of the double-negated subjunctive.
7 The infinitive ἐκχέαι αἷμα complements the adjective ταχινοί, indicating what their feet are quick to do.
8 In place of οἴδασιν (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has ἔγνωσαν, following the reading of Romans 3:17.
Romans 3:15-18 cites this prophecy: ὀξεῖς οἱ πόδες αὐτῶν ἐκχέαι αἷμα, σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. οὐκ ἔστιν φόβος θεοῦ ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. Eusebius (2.47) implied that the destruction referred to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, by quoting Luke 19:42-44. He said judgement and righteousness departed from the Jews and went to the Gentiles because when their “peace” came they did not welcome him, quoting Eph 2:14 and John 1:11. The “way of peace” is mentioned in Luke 1:79: ἐπιφᾶναι τοῖς ἐν σκότει καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου καθημένοις, τοῦ κατευθῦναι τοὺς πόδας ἡμῶν εἰς ὁδὸν εἰρήνης.
Light will become darkness for them(59:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 59:9-11]]
9 The word αὐτῶν after ὑπομεινάντων is missing in the orginal hand of Codex Vaticanus; Ottley has ὑπομεινάντων <αὐτῶν>. The genitive absolute is rare in Isaiah.
10 The text of Q lacks the negator οὐχ after ὡς (though it is present in the margin). Because in S the word following the negator οὐχ is ὡς, the whole comparison is being negated. A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have ὡς οὐχ. The participle ὑπαρχόντων agrees grammatically with the ὀφθαλμῶν (eyes), not with the blind or with the subject of the verb. The verb ὑπάρχω can indicate possession but in such cases the possessor is referred to in the dative case; rather the meaning is to be found in similar expressions Βαιθὴλ ἔσται ὡς οὐχ ὑπάρχουσα in Amos 5:5 (“Bethel will be as if she never existed”). Obadiah 16’s ἔσονται καθὼς οὐχ ὑπάρχοντες means it will be as if they never lived. In Haggai 2:3, the temple is καθὼς οὐχ ὑπάρχοντα ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν (“it seems to you as if it never existed”). In Sirach 44:9, ἀπώλοντο ὡς οὐχ ὑπάρξαντες appears alongside ἐγένοντο ὡς οὐ γεγονότες (as if they were not born). All these express the idea that something is so absent it is as if it never existed. In most manuscripts of Isa 59:10 it is as if the eyes never existed; in Q’s text, the eyes exist but the people still feel about. Still it is unclear why ὑπαρχόντων ὀφθαλμῶν is in the genitive case; it could be a genitive absolute, or a nominitive noun such as
ἄνθρωποι could be implied (“like people of existing eyes”). Ottley translated, “as though they had no eyes.” Eusebius made no comment that helps understand the grammar.
11 The expression Ἀνεμείναμεν κρίσιν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν recalls Isa 5:7 (ἔμεινα τοῦ ποιῆσαι κρίσιν, ἐποίησεν δὲ ἀνομίαν), as well as Isa 59:9 (καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν κρίσιν θεοῦ ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν) and anticipates Isa 59:15 (ὅτι οὐκ ἦν κρίσις). Eusebius (2.47) said the “noon” is the “saving and evangelical sunlight” that shines on the church of God.
We have acted unjustly(59:11-15)[[@Bible:Isa 59:11-15]]
13 Holger Gzella argued that most of the so-called poʻel-forms (including Isa 59:13) are the result of textual difficulties, and those that are textually solid do not support a distinct meaning for the poʿel. Rather, these forms appear to have been created ad hoc when a derivative form was needed (Gzella 2010).
14 Instead of the negative ἠδύναντο (the reading also of S and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A and B both have the positive ἐδύναντο. Half of the instances of the verb ἀφίστημι in Isaiah occur in Isa 59:9-14. The intransitive meaning is to go or stay away from something expressed in the genitive case. The transitive meaning of ἀφίστημι is to cause such a separation (commonly by persuading people to revolt); the only transitive use in Isaiah occurs here. The first-hand of Q lacks both the final nu in αὐτῶν (creating the dative αὐτῷ) and the article before ἀλήθεια. Normally in Q, the position of αὐτῶ would take an overbar to indicate the dropped nu; an overbar may have been erased by Q’s corrector to create room to insert both the nu and the article. The conjunction ὅτι introduces the cause of something, but it is unclear how far that cause extends. Certainly καταναλώθη ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν ἡ ἀλήθεια (following the reading of Q’s corrector, as well as S, A, B, Rahlfs and Ziegler) is included, but it is possible that it continues with καὶ διʼ εὐθείας οὐκ ἠδύναντο διελθεῖν. Eusebius’s treatment indicates that the cause continues through the coordinating conjunction καί.
Lord could find no one who was just(59:15-21)[[@Bible:Isa 59:15-18]]
15 The original scribe of S wrote συνιναι, matching the reading of A, a spelling variant of συνεῖναι, “be together”; it was changed by ca to συνιέναι “understand,” which is the reading also of Q, B (as συνειεναι), and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler.
16 The future participle conveys intention, so ὁ ἀντιλημψόμενος would signify someone willing to help. The only other future participles in Isaiah are at 1:31 (no one to extinguish) and 59:18. The expression οὐκ ἦν ὁ ἀντιλημψόμενος indicates there was no person in a position to help. Q regularly omits the mu in futures of -λαμβάνω: λήψεται, 2:4; 8:4; 10:29; 19:9; 23:5; 28:19; 30:28; 33:14; 41:16; 57:13; ἐπιλήψεται, 4:1; 5:29; λήψομαι, 10:10; λήψῃ, 14:4; περιληφθήσονται, 31:9; καταλήψεται, 35:10; λήψονται, 14:2; 39:6, 7; ἀναλήψομαι, 46:4; however, it was Q’s corrector who deleted the mu from ἀντιλημψόμενος here in 59:16, as from ἐπιλήμψεται, 3:6; from λήμψεται, 15:7; 26:11; 49:24, 25; 64:1, 3; from ἀντιλήμψομαι, 42:1; from λήμψομαι, 47:4; 66:21; from καταλήμψεται, 51:11. The first-hand scribe also omitted the mu in one aorist of λαμβάνω: ἐλήφθη, 52:5.
17 Paul drew on the image of wearing a metaphorical breastplate (representing peace rather than righteousness) and salvation as a helmet in 1 Thess 5:8: ἡμεῖς δὲ ἡμέρας ὄντες νήφωμεν ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ περικεφαλαίαν ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας. Ephesians 6:14-17 makes the same two allusions, but matches Isaiah more closely, in that the breastplate represents righteousness: στῆτε οὖν περιζωσάμενοι τὴν ὀσφὺν ὑμῶν ἐν ἀληθείᾳ καὶ ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν θώρακα τῆς δικαιοσύνης and καὶ τὴν περικεφαλαίαν τοῦ σωτηρίου δέξασθε καὶ τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος, ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ.
18 Eusebius found fulfilment of Isa 59:18 in the Jews’ suffering in the final siege at the time of the Romans (2.48).
19 Luke 13:29 also uses the expressions “from the west,” and “from the east,” καὶ ἥξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ νότου καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ. Eusebius (2.49) found fulfillment of the “west” and “east” in the calling of the Gentiles, of the Spirit of the Lord coming in the story of Pentecost (Acts 2:2-4), of the “sign for himself” in the ascension (John 15:26), of the spirit of the covenant in the bestowal of the spirit (John 20:22-23), and of the “light” in the message of the prophets to the people of Jerusalem.
20 Q’s ὁ ῥυόμενος matches A, B, 965, S corrector ca (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), and the citation in Rom 11:26, which reads Ἥξει ἐκ Σιὼν ὁ ῥυόμενος, ἀποστρέψει ἀσεβείας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβ; the first-hand of S lacks the article. The reason for difference in preposition between ἐκ and ἕνεκεν has been debated. E. Earle Ellis argued that Paul made the change intentionally (Ellis 1981). Weaver noted the possible influence of Psalms 13:7; 52:7; 109:2 (LXX), which use ἐκ Σιών (Weaver 2007). Schaller explained the difference as a scribal error, with לציון originally translated as εἰς Σιών (Schaller 1984). Stanley (1993) and Koch (1980) argued that Paul already had the modified text at hand.
21 The quotation continues in Romans 11:27 as καὶ αὕτη αὐτοῖς ἡ παρʼ ἐμοῦ διαθήκη. Of the two nominatives, αὕτη and ἡ διαθήκη, the subject is the more
definite αὕτη, yielding the meaning “this is the covenant.” The dative αὐτοῖς then indicates who the covenant is for, and the prepositional phrase παρʼ ἐμοῦ indicates its source.
Lord’s glory will shine on you(60:1-3)[[@Bible:Isa 60:1-4]]
1 If Jesus was alluding to scripture in John 8:12 (ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου· ὁ ἀκολουθῶν ἐμοὶ οὐ μὴ περιπατήσῃ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, ἀλλʼ ἕξει τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς), that scripture is probably Isa 60:1. Revelation 21:11 and 23 allude to God’s glory as a source of light for Jerusalem: 21:11 reads ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς ὅμοιος λίθῳ τιμιωτάτῳ ὡς λίθῳ ἰάσπιδι κρυσταλλίζοντι; Rev 21:23 reads καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ λύχνος αὐτῆς τὸ ἀρνίον. Eusebius wrote about “your light has come” as follows: “These things were partially but not entirely fulfilled at the first coming of our Savior, but they will come to pass completely at his second and glorious theophany” (2.49). He claimed that “arise” predicts the general resurrection (1 Thess 4:16). He found two commands for two different peoples at different times: “shine” is for the Jewish people, and “walk by your light” is for the church of the Gentiles.
2 Luke 1:78 refers to the light of God’s glory in the darkness. Of the words for darkness and gloom, σκότος καὶ γνόφος, the more common is σκότος; γνόφος appears in Isaiah elsewhere only in 44:22, where it is parallel with cloud; it appears six times in Job.
3 Revelation 21:24 continues the allusion by referring to nations and kings walking in the light: καὶ περιπατήσουσιν τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τοῦ φωτὸς αὐτῆς, καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς φέρουσιν τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν εἰς αὐτήν. The image of walking in light rather than darkness appears also in John 8:12: ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου· ὁ ἀκολουθῶν ἐμοὶ οὐ μὴ περιπατήσῃ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, ἀλλʼ ἕξει τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς. Regarding the “kings” of the Gentiles, Eusebius wrote, “And, one has to marvel and be amazed at the fulfillment of the oracle, how it was fulfilled during our times when the above kings were deemed worthy of the grace ‘by washing.’”
Foreigners will bring you gifts(60:4-7)[[@Bible:Isa 60:5-7]]
4 The translation “gathered together,” translates a participle συνηγμένα, not a finite verb, so the meaning is not “your children did gather together,” but “your children who have been gathered together.”
5 The verb μεταβάλλω typically refers to a change or exchange. In this case, the change is in the ownership of the wealth. Revelation 21:24 continues the allusion to foreigners bringing their wealth. In the view of Eusebius, the “multitude of the sea” is those being saved (2.49).
6 Matthew 2:11 mentions gold and frankincense as two of the gifts the foreigners bring. Instead of Saba, Eusebius’ text had Basan; in his view, those from Basan are “those in the church who are well off.” He speculated, “perhaps all these things would not have been literally fulfilled among them, if they had received our Savior and Lord Jesus Christ.”
7 Matthew 21:13 mentions “my house” as “a house of prayer: γέγραπται· ὁ οἶκός μου οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται, but that is more closely a combination of Isaiah 56:7 with Jeremiah 7:11.
Distant lands will restore your children(60:8-12)[[@Bible:Isa 60:8-9]]
9 Eusebius said, “the churches of God spend their time awaiting the promises that had been made to the fathers and the prophecies” (2.49).
11 Revelation 21:25-26 alludes to the ever-open gates, and the valuables of the nations being brought into Jerusalem: καὶ οἱ πυλῶνες αὐτῆς οὐ μὴ κλεισθῶσιν ἡμέρας, νὺξ γὰρ οὐκ ἔσται ἐκεῖ, καὶ οἴσουσιν τὴν δόξαν καὶ τὴν τιμὴν τῶν ἐθνῶν εἰς αὐτήν.
12 The relative pronoun οἵτινες adds a sense of indefiniteness, which might be conveyed in English with “whatever nations and kings will not serve you.” Although the pronoun is masculine and therefore agrees grammatically with the kings, the masculine could incorporate the (neuter) nations as well. Eusebius interpreted the “strangers” as the leaders of the church who defend the church
doctrines (2.49). The “kings” are the “rulers of the Roman legions,” except the kings that do not serve you are the kings of nations that died in idolatry (2.50). The “gates” are the teachers of doctrine. Evidently he was celebrating the baptism of Constantine.
Future prosperity, righteousness, peace, and light from Lord(60:13-22)[[@Bible:Isa 60:13-16]]
13 Eusebius interpreted the cedars as the educated leaders of the church (2.50), since the holy place is the church.
14 Revelation 3:9 echoes the reversal in which those that humbled the addressees will themselves be humbled, from Isa 60:14: ἰδοὺ διδῶ ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τοῦ σατανᾶ τῶν λεγόντων ἑαυτοὺς Ἰουδαίους εἶναι, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀλλὰ ψεύδονται. ἰδοὺ ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου καὶ γνῶσιν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἠγάπησά σε.
16 According to Eusebius, the “wealth of kings” consists of the gifts (including sacred spaces) from rulers to the church, apparently referring to Constantine.
18 Behind γλύμμα “engraving” is the Hebrew תהלה. According to Schleusner, תהלה (“praise”) was translated ἀγαλλίαμα here as in 61:11, which was corrupted by later scribes to γλύμμα. Eusebius knew the reading as γλύμμα but preferred to interpret the meaning on the basis of Aquila (ὕμνησις, “hymn”) and Symmachus (αἴνεσις, “praise”) (2.50).
19 The glory of God provides the light also in Rev 21:11 (ἔχουσαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ φωστὴρ αὐτῆς), Rev 21:23 (καὶ ἡ πόλις οὐ χρείαν ἔχει τοῦ ἡλίου οὐδὲ τῆς σελήνης ἵνα φαίνωσιν αὐτῇ, ἡ γὰρ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν), and Rev 22:5 (καὶ νὺξ οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσιν χρείαν φωτὸς λύχνου καὶ φωτὸς ἡλίου, ὅτι κύριος ὁ θεὸς φωτίσει ἐπʼ αὐτούς).
21 The noun φύτευμα indicates not the act of planting but the result of the planting action, i.e., something planted.
Lord anointed me with his spirit to proclaim good news(61:1-7)[[@Bible:Isa 61:1-3]]
1-3 Although the theme of the prophetic message continues from chapter 60, the change of grammatical person to first person signals a new prophecy. This cannot be the same speaker as in the end of chapter 60 because there Lord was speaking and here Lord is mentioned in the third person. This new prophecy continues at least through 61:4, speaking of the oppressed in the third person. 61:5 switches to second person, but God is still third person. Then 61:7 reverts to the third person for the people, and first person for God. Isaiah 61:3, 7, 10, and 11 are thematically linked by joy, also mentioned in 60:15; 62:5. The vocabulary of glory links 61:3 with what precedes and follows.
1 The prophecy expresses the speaker’s commission, in three parts: the presence of Lord’s spirit, Lord’s anointing, and the purpose of the anointing. The preposition εἵνεκεν takes a genitive that indicates the cause or reason. This case means the spirit on the speaker is the cause for the anointing, which is the reverse of what one would expect, since normally anointing results in the gift of the spirit. On the accent κηρύξαι see BDF §13; Swete, Ottley, Ziegler accent it as κηρῦξαι. LEH notes ἀνάβλεψις as a neologism; Tobit 14:2 has the corresponding verb in the sense of recovery of sight, but usually it refers to looking up, as used as early as Aristotle Physica 247b8. Nestle-Aland lists Matt 5:3; 11:5; Luke 6:20, 7:22; Acts 4:27, 10:38; Rev 5:10 as quotations of and allusions to Isa 61:1. Of these, Matt 5:3; Luke 6:20; and Rev 5:10 are not quotations or allusions. Matt 11:5 has τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. The parallel Luke 7:22 reads, τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν, χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται. Acts 4:27 has a possible allusion in συνήχθησαν γὰρ ἐπʼ ἀληθείας ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ ἐπὶ τὸν ἅγιον παῖδά σου Ἰησοῦν ὃν ἔχρισας, Ἡρῴδης τε καὶ Πόντιος Πιλᾶτος σὺν ἔθνεσιν καὶ λαοῖς Ἰσραήλ. Similarly, the allusion in Acts 10:38 is to the anointing: Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέθ, ὡς ἔχρισεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ δυνάμει, ὃς διῆλθεν εὐεργετῶν καὶ ἰώμενος πάντας τοὺς καταδυναστευομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ. But the clearest reference to Isa 61:1 is a citation in Luke 4:18-19. The wording there is πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπʼ ἐμὲ οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέν με κηρύξαι
αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν, ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει. κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν.
2 Luke 4:19 quotes Isaiah 61:2. A series of infinitives describes the content of the commission: to bring good news, to heal, to proclaim, to call, to encourage, and finally, in 61:3, to be given. Whereas most of the infinitives are active verbs of speaking, this last infinitive δοθῆναι does not fit the pattern. Rather, it is better interpreted as the content of one of the things said by the prophet. The infinitive is one Greek way of expressing indirect discourse (Porter 1992, sec. 11.1.2.2), much like English “I claim to be” means the same as “I claim that I am.” The prophet is proclaiming that glory will be given to the downcast; glory, oil, and clothing. The previous infinitive παρακαλέσαι cannot be interpreted similarly because it is active, so two accusatives (one the agent, and one the patient) would need to be present in the clause. Isa 61:2-3 is also alluded to in Matt 5:4 and Luke 6:21. Matt 5:4 reads, μακάριοι οἱ πενθοῦντες, ὅτι αὐτοὶ παρακληθήσονται. The connection with Luke 6:21 is not verbal but thematic: μακάριοι οἱ πεινῶντες νῦν, ὅτι χορτασθήσεσθε. μακάριοι οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν, ὅτι γελάσετε.
3 For the second τοῖς πενθοῦσιν (although this is the reading of Q, S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs) Ziegler has ἀντὶ πένθους by conjecture, on the basis of the Syropalestinian translation, and the MT, explaining τοῖς πενθοῦσιν as a repetition from earlier in this verse.
3 The subject of the third person plural verbs would most naturally be those who mourn, mentioned in 61:2-3. Here they are prophesied to acquire a righteous name, and rebuild eternal cities. φύτευμα, a thing that is planted, recalls 60:21, φυλάσσων τὸ φύτευμα.
4 Q and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) read ἐξηρημωμένας twice in 61:4; in the first instance, A instead wrote ἐξῃρημένας; S wrote ἐξῃρημένας instead of the second ἐξηρημωμένας. The change of A and S makes the participle indicate what will happen after rather than before the restoration. Instead of raising up cities that had been abandoned, A has them raising up those that had been rescued, since the passive of ἐξαιρέω conveys removal, often from danger, as in Gen 37:21 or Eccl 7:26; rather than renewing cities that had been deserted, S has them renewing cities that will now be eternal.
5 In this future time of restoration, the prosperity will be of such an extent that the people of God will not have to perform manual labour. Instead, such work will be performed by foreigners, while those who serve Lord will be able to devote themselves to divine service. The present participle ποιμαίνοντες modifies the main verb ἥξουσιν. Normally present participles convey simultaneous action; they indicate what is happening while the action of the main verb takes place. That would mean the foreigners are tending the sheep as they are travelling; so reads Silva’s translation. But the context favors an interpretation that the foreigners come in order to tend the sheep. Classical Greek would use a future participle ποιμανοῦντες for such a purpose.
6 Rev 1:6 and 5:10 allude to Isa 61:6; they draw a connection between serving as God’s priest and ruling the world. Rev 1:6 reads, καὶ ἐποίησεν ἡμᾶς βασιλείαν, ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ. Rev 5:10 reads, καὶ ἐποίησας αὐτοὺς τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν βασιλείαν καὶ ἱερεῖς, καὶ βασιλεύσουσιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. Such will be the status of the addressees of this prophecy.
7 The pronouns shift to the third person in 61:7, where now “they” are to reinherit the land taken from them. ὑπέρ with the genitive normally is used to convey interest or benefit, although it can be used in a locative sense, as in Deut 28:23: καὶ ἔσται σοι ὁ οὐρανὸς ὁ ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς σου χαλκοῦς. Such is the sense of ὑπέρ κεφαλῆς (61:7). ὑπέρ is never used for resting on top of something, so the joy is higher than but not touching their heads.
He will be known among the nations(61:8-10)[[@Bible:Isa 61:8-10]]
8 The reason for the joy above their head is introduced by γάρ. It is because of Lord’s character: he loves righteousness and hates injustice. The implication is that the injustice that Lord’s people had suffered is being punished, and perhaps also their righteousness is being rewarded. The phrase ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος translates אני יהוה. μόχθος is hard labour, translating פעלתם, “their work.” Ottley suggested this might mean not their toil but their reward for work, citing other examples of wages and reward that use work vocabulary in Isa 40:10; 49:4; 62:11, and mentioning also 45:14; 55:2; 65:7. These explain the meaning of the Hebrew, but not the choice of the Greek word. In G, as well as the rest of the OG, פְּעֻלָּה is usually translated ἔργον, and μόχθος is usually from עָמָל in OG. The only other instance of μόχθος in G translates יְגִיעַ in 55:2. Ziegler’s reading
δικαίως for δικαίοις is supported only by the 11th-century manuscript 544 and MT. Silva translates Ziegler’s reading as “I will give them their hard word righteously.” Heb 13:20 alludes to the eternal covenant of Isa 61:8 as follows: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν. Those who reinherit the land will be famous throughout the world, as a people God has blessed.
Lord has clothed me with salvation(61:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 61:10-11]]
10 Susan Stephens (1985) described papyrus Yale 88, which includes Isa 61:10-11. Following the Hebrew, the verbs shift to the first person, but the theme of joy continues. Luke 1:47 has the verbal allusion καὶ ἠγαλλίασεν τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπὶ τῷ θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρί μου. The joy is symbolized by wedding clothes. It is these clothes that are alluded to in Rev 19:8: καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτῇ ἵνα περιβάληται βύσσινον λαμπρὸν καθαρόν· τὸ γὰρ βύσσινον τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἁγίων ἐστίν. The author of Revelation makes the connection more explicit with the verbal parallel in Rev 21:2, which also mentions a renewed city (61:4): καὶ τὴν πόλιν τὴν ἁγίαν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καινὴν εἶδον καταβαίνουσαν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡτοιμασμένην ὡς νύμφην κεκοσμημένην τῷ ἀνδρὶ αὐτῆς.
11 A botanical simile is used to convey the natural outcome of Lord’s character: he produces righteousness and joy as inevitably as plants produce flowers and seeds, and this outcome will be evident to all.
My righteousness will shine to the nations(62:1-5)[[@Bible:Isa 62:1-2]]
1 The beginning of chapter 62 is connected to what precedes by the themes of righteousness and salvation. The speaker on one hand will not be silent (οὐ σιωπήσομαι), and on the other hand will not raise (οὐκ ἀνήσω) his voice. Q and the other uncials (A, B, and S corrector ca, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the future σιωπήσομαι where the original scribe of S and S corrector cb3 have the subjunctive σιωπήσωμαι. The discrepancy is not surprising; the omicron and omega were not readily distinguishable by ear. What is surprising is that corrector cb3 considered this difference worth correcting to a reading not extant in other ancient witnesses. This pattern indicates that cb3 was simply reinforcing faded lettering, without reference to another manuscript.
2 In 62:1 the righteousness and salvation are the property of the speaker, but in 62:2 the righteousness and glory are the property of the addressee, and the Lord (notably with the article) is referred to in the third person. The message is the righteousness will be so manifest in Jerusalem as to attract the attention of other nations.
Isaiah 62:2 is alluded to in Rev 2:17 and 19:12, with the mention of a new name in Rev 2:17. In Revelation it is written name that no one else knows (καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ ψῆφον λευκήν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ψῆφον ὄνομα καινὸν γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ ὁ λαμβάνων). There is a subsequent reference to the secret written name in Rev 19:12 (ἔχων ὄνομα γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ αὐτός).
Jerusalem’s walls watched by guards who remember Lord(62:6-7)[[@Bible:Isa 62:3-7]]
6 The present participle μιμνῃσκόμενοι is contemporaneous with σιωπήσονται, so that the acts of remembering are vocal. The allusion to 62:6 in Rev 21:12 identifies the φύλακας on the walls as ἀγγέλους on the gates, and continues the theme of written names. It reads ἔχουσα τεῖχος μέγα καὶ ὑψηλόν, ἔχουσα πυλῶνας δώδεκα καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς πυλῶσιν ἀγγέλους δώδεκα καὶ ὀνόματα ἐπιγεγραμμένα, ἅ ἐστιν [τὰ ὀνόματα] τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ.
7 In 62:6 the second person pronouns were singular; in 62:7 we find the plural ὑμῖν. Therefore the morphologically ambiguous διορθώσῃ and ποιήσῃ, which could be third person singular active subjunctive or second person singular middle (indicative or subjunctive), more naturally should be read as third person forms, as Ottley and Silva did. LEH notes that ἀγαυρίαμα is a neologism, but Eusebius made no comment on this vocabulary that might help us make sense of what it could mean for Jerusalem to become “boastfulness.” He implied only that Jerusalem’s transformation into ἀγαυρίαμα is part of God’s promise.
Lord will no longer give your produce to your enemies(62:8-12)[[@Bible:Isa 62:8-9]]
8 The combination of ὄμνυμι or ὀμνύω with εἰ is an instance of aposiopesis, breaking off the apodosis in the context of a curse. The resulting meaning is a negative promise, as in Psalm 94:11’s εἰ εἰσελεύσονται, a phrase made famous by its quotation in Hebrews 3:11; 4:3, 5, “they shall certainly not enter.” The choice of Rahlfs and Ziegler to read δεξιᾶς αὐτοῦ rather than δόξης αὐτοῦ is supported only by a corrector of B, V, Jerome, and the MT.
9 The prophecy promises that the oppression whereby the agricultural producers in the past had the fruit of their labours taken from them (whether in war or in taxation is not specified) is about to be undone. Henceforth, Lord swears, workers will enjoy their own produce.
10-12 The theme of manifest salvation continues, with the mention of σωτήρ in 62:11 and the signal for the nations in 62:10. So too does the symbolism of names; in this case, the city is renamed, indicating the reversal of its former plight: from forsaken to desirable.
10 Instead of the expected imperative, πορεύεσθε (the reading of Q’s corrector, the first-hand of S, A, and B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the first-hand of Q and S corrector cb3 have the infinitive, πορεύεσθαι. The double presence of the article in S and A (Rahlfs) reading τοὺς λίθους τοὺς ἐκ τῆς ὁδοῦ makes the prepositional phrase limit the noun (stones) rather than the verb (throw) as in Q, B, S corrector cb2 (Ziegler). The use of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς τὰ ἔθνη rather than ἐν indicates that the message the signal conveys is directed toward the nations, and the signal does not come from the nations.
11 The participle ἔχων indicates that when the savior appears (παραγέγονεν) he has the reward with him. Remarkably (because cb2 usually makes changes
in the opposite direction), corrector cb2 changed the reading of A (παραγίνεται), to the reading of B (and Q), παραγέγονεν. Matt 21:5 quotes from Isa 62:11, but only the first four words of this composite quotation are from Isaiah; the remainder are from Zech 9:9. Matt 21:5 reads εἴπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὄνον καὶ ἐπὶ πῶλον υἱὸν ὑποζυγίου. Zech 9:9 has Χαῖρε σφόδρα, θύγατερ Σιων· κήρυσσε, θύγατερ Ιερουσαλημ· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι, δίκαιος καὶ σῴζων αὐτός, πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον.
Who comes in power from Edom?(63:1)[[@Bible:Isa 63:1]]
1 The dative βίᾳ indicates the manner in which the arrival takes place (Porter 1992, sec. 4.2.5.3); it is not in apposition to στολῇ or otherwise governed by the preposition ἐν.
Why are your clothes wine red?(63:1–6)[[@Bible:Isa 63:2-3]]
1
2 The neuter plurals ἐρυθρὰ τὰ ἱμάτια are nominative, since this is a verbless clause. The first-hand of Q initirally wrote ἐρυθὰ, before inserting a superscripted rho (ἐρυθρὰ) to fix the error. The red clothing is alluded to in Rev 19:13: καὶ περιβεβλημένος ἱμάτιον βεβαμμένον αἵματι, καὶ κέκληται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ. The image of the winepress trodden in wrath is used in Rev 14:19: καὶ ἔβαλεν ὁ ἄγγελος τὸ δρέπανον αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν γῆν καὶ ἐτρύγησεν τὴν ἄμπελον τῆς γῆς καὶ ἔβαλεν εἰς τὴν ληνὸν τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν μέγαν and again in Rev 19:15: καὶ ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ ἐκπορεύεται ῥομφαία ὀξεῖα, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῇ πατάξῃ τὰ ἔθνη, καὶ αὐτὸς ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ, καὶ αὐτὸς πατεῖ τὴν ληνὸν τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ παντοκράτορος.
3 Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have the nominative πλήρης, which agrees grammatically with nothing and therefore must be part of a separate clause from what
precedes; the reader must supply a subject, such as “I am full of what has been trodden.” S instead has the genitive πλήρους, which agrees with the winepress. The participle καταπεπατημένης is also genitive, and because ληνός is feminine it could describe the winepress. Alternatively, because πλήρης is typically followed by a genitive of the filling substance, the genitive could indicate what the winepress is full of: what has been trodden. In this case the trodden thing is feminine, which could be the earth/land, as in Rev 14:19.
3 LEH notes that καταθλάω is a neologism.
4 Ottley suggested G read בא להם (ἐπῆλθεν αὐτοῖς) instead of בלבי “in my heart.”
6 G read שׁבר, “shatter” instead of שׁכר, “make drunk.”
Lord is a merciful judge(63:7-9)[[@Bible:Isa 63:7-9]]
8 Instead of the subjunctive ἀθετήσωσιν of Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the future ἀθετήσουσιν. The οὐχ followed by another negative οὐ μή is hard to interpret. Eusebius explained that God honours his people by calling them his children, if they do not reject his grace (2.54).
They provoked his holy spirit(63:9-11)[[@Bible:Isa 63:10-11]]
10 The preposition εἰς indicates the result of the turning; the new situation is enmity against them. Acts 7:51 is probably referring to this statement of provoking the holy spirit: Σκληροτράχηλοι καὶ ἀπερίτμητοι καρδίαις καὶ τοῖς ὠσίν, ὑμεῖς ἀεὶ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ ἀντιπίπτετε ὡς οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν καὶ ὑμεῖς. Ephesians 4:30 mentions grieving God’s holy spirit: καὶ μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ᾧ ἐσφραγίσθητε εἰς ἡμέραν ἀπολυτρώσεως.
Lord’s holy spirit led Moses and the people(63:11-16)[[@Bible:Isa 63:11-14]]
11 The reading of S (γῆς) agrees with A but is not mentioned by Ziegler; B has τῆς θαλάσσης, agreeing with MT; Q (Rahlfs and Ziegler) has τῆς γῆς. Here B has a hexaplaric reading. Hebrews 13:20 alludes to the rasing of the shepherd of the sheep, but changes the word for “Bring” from ἀναβιβάσας to ἀναγαγών and changes the “earth” to the “dead”: Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν.
12 Instead of κατίσχυσεν (the reading also of S, A, and B, and followed by Rahlfs), Ziegler conjectured κατέσχισεν, on the basis of the MT alone.
13 Instead of διʼ ἐρήμου, Ziegler spelled it διὰ ἐρήμου.
15 Instead of ἴδε, Q’s accenter (Rahlfs) used the Attic accentuation ἰδὲ (see BDAG ἴδε and εἶδον). The reading of S (οἰκτιρμοί) was changed by ca to οἱ οἰκτιρμοί, and by cb2 to τῶν οἰκτειρμῶν, matching Q and A (B has anarthrous οἰκτειρμῶν, and Rahlfs and Ziegler spell it τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν). The words ἔλεος and οἰκτιρμός overlap semantically. Both refer to expressions of concern for another’s misfortune. Typically ἔλεος is used for חֶסֶד and οἰκτιρμός is used for רַחֲמִים, but here the word behind ἔλεος is מֵעֶה.
16 The notion of calling God “Father,” and mention of his name both appear in the prayer Jesus taught in Matt 6:9, Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς· Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου. Later in the same prayer is the request ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς. God as Father appears also in John 8:41 (ἕνα πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν θεόν) and in James 3:9 (εὐλογοῦμεν τὸν κύριον καὶ πατέρα).
Do not keep us from you(63:17-19)[[@Bible:Isa 63:17-19]]
17 Q and the first-hand of S lack ἀπό after Κύριε; S corrector ca added it, in agreement with A and B (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). The reading of S (τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν), which agrees
with B, was changed by cb2 to ἡμῶν τὰς καρδίας, in agreement with Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). This is a rare case of cb2 changing only the word order, not the meaning.
18 The scribes of both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus appear to have suffered from parablepsis; his eye skipped from one σου to the next, omitting οἱ ὑπεναντίοι ἡμῶν κατεπάτησαν τὸ ἁγίασμά σου, which the other manuscripts Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have.
Mountains will tremble at you(64:1-5) [[@Bible:Isa 64:1-3]]
1 (Rahlfs 63:19) Rahlfs puts the words ἐὰν ἀνοίξῃς τὸν οὐρανόν, τρόμος λήμψεται ἀπὸ σοῦ ὄρη, καὶ τακήσονται in 63:19, with MT; Swete, Ottley, and Ziegler put them in their own verse, 64:1, increasing the verse numbering in chapter 64 relative to the MT. Q has punctuation, a line break, and an overbar before these words, so my numbering follows that of Swete, Ottley, and Ziegler. The preposition ἀπό here and in verse 3 indicates the cause of the trembling; we could say the mountains will tremble “at” you.
2 (Rahlfs 1) The form τήκεται could be middle (“melts”) or passive (“is melted”). G read המסים as if from מסם “melt,” and κηρός might be a guess for קדח according to its phonological similarity if read as קרה. Instead of בעה G read בער, “burn.”
3 (Rahlfs 2) As in verse 1, ἀπό indicates the cause of the trembling.
4 (Rahlfs 3) Paul apparently cited this verse in 1 Cor 2:9: ἀλλὰ καθὼς γέγραπται· ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν. According to Ponsot (1983), the quoted text went through six stages: Stage 1 (Deuteronomic): a. καί τὰ ἔργα σου ἅ ποιεῖς. / ποιήσεις ἔλεος τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν. b. καὶ τὰ ἔργα σου ἃ ποιεῖς. / ποιήσεις ἔλεος τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν. Stage 2 (intermediate): καὶ τά εργα σου ἃ ποιήσεις / ἔλεος τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν. Stage 3 (LXX tradition): … καὶ τὰ ἔργα σου / ἅ ποιήσεις τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν ἔλεος. Stage 4 (Syrian): θεὸν πλὴν σου. τὰ ἔργα σου ἀ(ληθινά). / ποιήσεις ἔλεος τοῖς
ὑπομένουσιν. Stage 5 (Clementine): ὅσα ἠτοίμασεν τοῖς ὑπομένουσιν αὐτόν. Stage 6 (Pauline): ἃ ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν.
You have humbled us because of our sins(64:5-7)[[@Bible:Isa 64:5-12]]
5 (Rahlfs 4) Ottley suggested that instead of נושע, G read נפשע, but according to Blank (1952), G did not translate the (difficult) Hebrew בהם עולם ונושׁע; rather G substituted a similar thought from 63:17, accusing Lord of misleading them: Τί ἐπλάνησας ἡμᾶς, Κύριε, τῆς ὁδοῦ σου, ἐσκλήρυνας τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν τοῦ μὴ φοβεῖσθαί σε;
6 (Rahlfs 5) Q, S, A (Ottley), and B* (Swete) spelled ἐξερρύημεν as ἐξερύημεν.
Look upon your people, Lord(64:8-12)[[@Bible:Isa 64:5-12]]
8 (Rahlfs 6-7) In Matt 6:9, Jesus teaches his disciples to call God “our father”: Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου·
9 (Rahlfs 8) Instead of לעד, “forever,” G read לעת, “at the time.”
10 (Rahlfs 9) Ottley and Swete placed the words εἰς κατάραν in the sentence preceding; Rahlfs and Ziegler in the sentence following. I follow Ottley and Swete because the punctuation in Q occurs before these words.
11 (Rahlfs 10) The spelling of Q’s first-hand, ηὐλόγησαν agrees with A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler); it was later corrected to εὐλόγησαν, which agrees with S and B.
12 (Rahlfs 11) The middle voice of ἀνέχω refers to withstanding something difficult, as in 2 Thess 1:4; 1 Cor 4:12. Normally when this verb is used transitively, the thing withstood appears in the genitive case (Isa 46:4), but sometimes in the accusative (Isa 1:13). When used intransitively, the verb refers to self-restraint, as in Isa 42:14. Such is the usage here, with ἐπί indicating what potentially might have caused provocation but did not do so because of the self-restraint.
I was available to those who did not seek me(65:1)[[@Bible:Isa 65:1-2]]
Natalio Fernández Marcos showed that the textual variants in Isaiah 65-66 attest a pattern of readings in manuscripts Ziegler called “Lucianic.” In these manuscripts he identified 13 small changes taken from the Three toward
conformity with the Masoretic Text, but even more stylistic improvements and a few Atticizing tendencies. He then pointed out a few older readings preserved in Antiochene manuscrpts, readings that were supplanted in later manuscripts Finally, he noted the Antiochene reading was an exegetical method that emphasised the historical over the allegorical method of interpretation, but he did not associate this method with specific Antiochene textual readings. In other words, the label “Antiochene reading” does not constitute a witness to Antiochene theology in the same way as Seeligmann claimed the Old Greek was a witness to Alexandrian theology (Fernández Marcos 2010).
1 Rom 10:20 cites Isa 65:1 as εὑρέθην τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ ζητοῦσιν, ἐμφανὴς ἐγενόμην τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ ἐπερωτῶσιν, with transposed participles, like B. The verb ἐπερωτάω when it has deity as its object, can refer to inquiring after that deity (BDAG s.v. 1.c).
I stretched out my hands to a resistant people(65:2)[[@Bible:Isa 65:1-2]]
2 Paul continued the citation in Rom 10:21: ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν ἐξεπέτασα τὰς χεῖράς μου πρὸς λαὸν ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα, with one transposed phrase: the adverbial temporal clause is in a different position. Q has punctuation between ἀντιλέγοντα and τοῖς πορευομένοις, so the dative is the object not of the participle ἀντιλέγοντα but of the earlier indicative ἐξεπέτασα. Typically, ἀντιλέγω is transitive, with the dative indicating what is being opposed. The intransitive use of ἀντιλέγω appears also in Isa 22:22 and 50:5.
Lord will repay false worshippers(65:3-7)[[@Bible:Isa 65:3-7]]
4 Matt 8:28 and Mark 5:3 use the same word for tombs: ὑπήντησαν αὐτῷ δύο δαιμονιζόμενοι ἐκ τῶν μνημείων ἐξερχόμενοι and ὃς τὴν κατοίκησιν εἶχεν ἐν τοῖς μνήμασιν respectively. Instead of διʼ (the spelling also of A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B has the spelling διά. Instead of κρέα ὕεια (the reading of S, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), the original hand of Q wrote κρέα ὕιον; Q’s corrector opted for the reading of B, κρέας ὕειον. A has a variant spelling κρέα ὕια. Although a perfect participle rather than an adjective is used to indicate the vessels are defiled, the emphasis is not on the past action but on the present state. This is typical for μολύνω, as in Isa 59:3.
5 Instead of the Hebrew second person pronouns on קרב אליך (Πόρρω ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ) and קדשׁתיך (καθαρός εἰμι) G has first person forms. The words ἐν αὐτῷ have no counterpart in the Hebrew.
6 Instead of the active σιωπήσω (the reading also of S and B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has the middle σιωπήσομαι. Whereas A and B have either the subjunctive ἀποδῶ or the future ἀποδώσω, S has both ἀποδῶ καὶ ἀνταποδώσω, adding a slightly different future verb, which matches the Hebrew better (שלמתי ושלמתי). Codex Marchalianus (Q) includes ἀποδῶ καὶ ἀνταποδώσω with an asterisk between ἀποδῶ and καί.
For the sake of one faithful, I will not destroy all people(65:8-9)[[@Bible:Isa 65:8-10]]
8 Instead of the οὕτως of manuscripts Q, A and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S spells it οὕτω.
9 The article τό before the proposition ἐξ indicates that the prepositional phrases “from Jacob” and “from Judah” modify not the verb (bringing from Jacob) but the noun (the seed that is from Jacob). The repeated neuter singular article before the preposition τὸ ἐξ Ἰούδα implies “seed” again.
False worshippers will fall by the sword(65:10-12)[[@Bible:Isa 65:11-12]]
11 The spelling of ἐγκαταλιπόντες is attested in Q and B )followed by Rahlfs); S has ενκαταλιποντες; A (Ottley) and Ziegler spelled it ἐγκαταλείποντές. Paul alluded to the table prepared for demons in 1 Cor 10:21: οὐ δύνασθε ποτήριον κυρίου πίνειν καὶ ποτήριον δαιμονίων, οὐ δύνασθε τραπέζης κυρίου μετέχειν καὶ τραπέζης δαιμονίων.
Lord’s servants will prosper, but not you(65:13-15)[[@Bible:Isa 65:13-16]]
13 The verb διψήσεσθε is spelled διψήσεσθαι in S as in A; it was changed by S corrector cb3 to διψήσεται, a homophone of διψήσετε, which is what Q and B (Rahlfs, Ziegler) have. The nominative plural second person pronoun requires the second person indicative forms. Luke 6:25 also predicts a reversal in which those currently in power will experience hunger: οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, οἱ ἐμπεπλησμένοι νῦν, ὅτι πεινάσετε.
14 Where the MT has prepositional phrase מטוב לב, indicating that the cause of the shout is goodness of heart, G has ἐν εὐφροσύνῃ, and G’s preposition matches that of 1QIsaa ב טוב לב.
15 The dative τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς μου indicates the recipients of the gratification: “my chosen people.” Revelation alludes to the new name given to the chosen people, possible playing on the similarity of the words ἐκκλησίαις and ἐκλεκτοῖς. Rev 2:17 reads, Ὁ ἔχων οὖς ἀκουσάτω τί τὸ πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις. Τῷ νικῶντι δώσω αὐτῷ τοῦ μάννα τοῦ κεκρυμμένου καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ ψῆφον λευκήν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ψῆφον ὄνομα καινὸν γεγραμμένον ὃ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν εἰ μὴ ὁ λαμβάνων. Q has a large space between μοι and κληθήσεται.
They, not others, will enjoy their produce(65:15-22)[[@Bible:Isa 65:13-16]]
16 The adjective ἀληθινός is applied to Jesus in Rev 3:14: Τάδε λέγει ὁ ἀμήν, ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστὸς καὶ ἀληθινός, ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ. Q’s scribe initially wrote ἐπιλήψονται (Q frequently omits the mu in futures of –λαμβάνω) before catching his own mistake; he erased the psi and wrote a sigma instead, to give ἐπιλήσονται (from ἐπιλανθάνομαι), matching the reading of S, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler).
17 The expression ἔσται γὰρ ὁ οὐρανὸς καινὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καινή might alternatively be translated, “For there will be the new sky and the new earth.” Second Peter 3:13 alludes to this new sky and earth: καινοὺς δὲ οὐρανοὺς καὶ καινὴν γῆν, as does Rev 21:1: Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶ γῆν καινήν: ὁ γὰρ πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ ἀπῆλθαν.
18 The two words εὐφροσύνη and ἀγαλλίαμα are near synonyms. Typically, the semantic range of Greek εὐφροσύνη has to do with festivity (merry-making), and ἀγαλλιάω with rejoicing, and In Isaiah the semantic range of εὐφροσύνη is likewise more active, overlapping with English celebration, whereas ἀγαλλίαμα is more audible, overlapping with shouts of joy. Probably because of the similarity in sound, the Hebrew גיל tends to be translated as ἀγαλλίαμα, and behind the more common εὐφροσύνη we tend to find the roots רנן, שׂמח, and שׂושׂ. Luke 6:21 also describes a reversal of mourning into rejoicing, but with differing vocabulary: μακάριοι οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν, ὅτι γελάσετε.
19 Revelation 21:4 alludes to the cessation of sorrow: καὶ ἐξαλείψει πᾶν δάκρυον ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁ θάνατος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι, ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν.
20 The original reading of S, καὶ οὐκέτι was changed by cb2 to καὶ οὐ, matching Q and A (and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), but it was reverted by cb3; B has οὐδʼ οὐ, but adds ἔτι after γένηται. Ottley spelled ἐμπλήσει (Q, S*, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) as ἐνπλήσει. Swete and Ottley spelled ἀποθνῄσκων as ἀποθνήσκων. Whereas the MT implies that a person might die at the age of 100 but that that lifespan would be considered short, G can be read to mean that only sinners would die even at the age of 100, which would be considered an early death. The difference between the MT and G need not be theologically motivated. It can be explained by positing three misreadings of the Hebrew, all involving waw (he read the MT’s yods as waw, and the MT’s waws as nothing), just as at the beginning of the verse instead of לֹא G read וְלֹא (as in 1QIsaa) and therefore wrote καὶ οὐ.
Instead of יָמוּת, G read וַמֵּת, and wrote ὁ δὲ ἀποθνῄσκων
Instead of וְהַחוֹטֶא, G read חַטָּא, and wrote ἁμαρτωλὸς
Instead of יְקֻלָּל, G read וְקֻלָּל, and wrote καὶ ἐπικατάρατος ἔσται
Misreading 3 (adding καὶ) indicates that G was reading yods as waws, that he was expecting waw-prefixed qatals with future meaning. Misreading 1 (adding δὲ) indicates that G read that yod as a waw. This waw would signal to him that a new clause is beginning. He then had to find the best way to express the Hebrew of the clause that just ended (הַנַּעַר בֶּן־מֵאָה שָׁנָה). This was a verbless clause, so he had to supply a verb of being. The context is future, so the verb he supplied was ἔσται. Misreading 2 happened as a consequence of misreading 1. Having committed to a new clause beginning with וַמֵּת, he was reluctant to immediately start a new one. Either he simply ignored the waw and he, or he read the text as if the waw and he were moved to יָמוּת.
21 Instead of the futures καταφυτεύσουσιν and φάγονται (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the subjunctives καταφυτεύσωσιν and φάγωνται.
22 Instead of the future φυτεύσουσιν (Q, A, B, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S has the subjunctive φυτεύσωσιν.
No injustice or harm will be done on Lord’s holy mountain22-
23 The manuscripts S and B (and Q’s corrector) use the spelling εὐλογημένον, but the first-hand of Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) spelled it ηὐλογημένον. The words καὶ τὰ ἔκγονα αὐτῶν μετʼ αὐτῶν are present in the manuscripts Q, S, A, and B (and therefore Rahlfs included them), but are absent in Ziegler because they are under asterisk in V. Paul alluded to labour not being in vain in 1 Cor 15:58 (ὁ κόπος ὑμῶν οὐκ ἔστιν κενὸς ἐν κυρίῳ) and Phil 2:16 (οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα).
24 G conveys the sense of אשמע, “I will hear” dramatically, with ἐρῶ Τί ἐστιν;
25 The peaceful coexistence of the natural enemies wolves and lambs recalls 11:6: Καὶ συμβοσκηθήσεται λύκος μετὰ ἀρνός, καὶ πάρδαλις συναναπαύσεται ἐρίφῳ, καὶ μοσχάριον καὶ ταῦρος καὶ λέων ἅμα βοσκηθήσονται.
What house would you build for me?(66:1-2)[[@Bible:Isa 66:1-2]]
1 The words οὕτω λέγει Κύριος were added to S by scribe B himself; Q, A, and B (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have οὕτως λέγει Κύριος. Matthew alludes to the sky and earth being God’s throne and footstool in Matt 5:34-35: ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ὀμόσαι ὅλως· μήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶν τοῦ θεοῦ. μήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι ὑποπόδιόν ἐστιν τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ. John 4:21 alludes to God’s independence from temples without using any of the vocabulary of Isaiah 66:1: ἔρχεται ὥρα ὅτε οὔτε ἐν τῷ ὄρει τούτῳ οὔτε ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις προσκυνήσετε τῷ πατρί. Isa 66:1-2 is quoted in Acts 7:49-50 as ὁ οὐρανός μοι θρόνος, ἡ δὲ γῆ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν μου· ποῖον οἶκον οἰκοδομήσετέ μοι, λέγει κύριος, ἢ τίς τόπος τῆς καταπαύσεώς μου; οὐχὶ ἡ χείρ μου ἐποίησεν ταῦτα πάντα; Isaiah 66:1 is reproduced nearly verbatim, but the phrases from 66:2 are rearranged.
I will look upon the humble and quiet(66:2-3)[[@Bible:Isa 66:3-4]]
3 According to Kim (2009, 207–8), the words ὁ δὲ ἄνομος with no Hebrew counterpart refer to the same people described in 33:14: priests who had formerly offered improper sacrifices had departed Zion, and the sacrifices offered were thereafter acceptable. The word transcribed as ὕειον was spelled ὕιον in the first-hand of Q, S, and A (which could be the masculine accusative noun “son”), but the neuter context requires an adjective, which is what B has (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Q originally had ὕιον, but that reading was subsequently corrected to ὕειον as in 65:4. Sasson (1976) noted that the presence of the comparator ὡς (corresponding to 1QIsaa כמכה but absent in MT) means even some lawful rituals are a condemned.
I will repay those who rebuff me(66:3-4)[[@Bible:Isa 66:3-4]]
4 LEH notes that τὰ ἐμπαίγματα αὐτῶν is a neologism. Instead of ἐμπαίγματα, A has the spelling ἐνπαίγματα. In Isaiah, outside of chapters 7 and 14, the verb ἐκλέγομαι only appears in chapter 40-66; it almost always is a translation of בחר. The form ἠβουλόμην is imperfect, but the significance of this form rather than the aorist is not clear. There is an allusion in 2 Thess 1:8 to those who do not obey: ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ.
Those who hate us will be put to shame(66:5)[[@Bible:Isa 66:5]]
5 Instead of καὶ ἐκεῖνοι (the spelling of S and B), Q and A (followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler) have κἀκεῖνοι. In 2 Thess 1:12 the glorification of the Lord’s name is applied to Jesus: ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν.
Repayment; bearing a son before going into labour(66:6-9)[[@Bible:Isa 66:6-7]]
6 The great voice from the temple is alluded to in Rev 16 at verses 1 (Καὶ ἤκουσα μεγάλης φωνῆς ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ λεγούσης τοῖς ἑπτὰ ἀγγέλοις· ὑπάγετε καὶ ἐκχέετε τὰς ἑπτὰ φιάλας τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς τὴν γῆν) and 17 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν φωνὴ μεγάλη ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ θρόνου λέγουσα· γέγονεν.
7 Chapter 12 of Revelation alludes to the pregnant woman about to give birth to a male child. Verse 2 has: καὶ ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα, καὶ κράζει ὠδίνουσα καὶ βασανιζομένη τεκεῖν. Verse 5 has: καὶ ἔτεκεν υἱὸν ἄρσεν, and says this child will shepherd all nations with a rod of iron.
8 Instead of ἑώρακεν (the spelling of S and A, followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), Q and B spell it ἑόρακεν.
9 According to Eusebius, the expectation was given by the prophecies, which predicted future events. When those events took place, those witnessing them should have gained faith; instead they did not remember God (2.57).
Enjoy, Mother Jerusalem(66:10-11)[[@Bible:Isa 66:10-11]]
10 Instead of an article and participle such as πάντες οἱ ἀγαπῶντες, which would match the Hebrew, G uses a relative pronoun and indicative verb in πάντες ὅσοι πενθεῖτε, with no apparent difference in meaning.
Lord will comfort you like a mother in Jerusalem(66:12-16)[[@Bible:Isa 66:12-14]]
12 Instead of the verb with object ינקתם, “you will nurse,” G read the noun with possessive יונקיהם, “your infants.”
13 Instead of καὶ ἐγώ (the spelling also of A and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), S and B spell it κἀγώ.
14 John 16:22 quotes from this verse with the words πάλιν δὲ ὄψομαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ χαρήσεται ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία.
15 The noun ἀποσκορακισμόν is cognate with the verb ἀποσκορακίζω, which is used in Isa 17:3 and Psalm 26 (27):9 in the sense of “dismiss.” The dismissal can refer to execration or cursing. The allusion in 2 Thess 1:8 (ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ) also draws from earlier verses in Isa 66.
16 According to Eusebius, God used physical metaphors in order for the Jews to understand the threats, and Romans 2:5-6 has this verse in mind.
False worshippers will be destroyed(66:17-21)[[@Bible:Isa 66:17-18]]
17 The phrase ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό is an idiom indicating togetherness, usually of time (“at the same time,” Deut 22:10), location (“at the same place,” Deut 25:5), interaction (fighting together Deut 25:11) or fate (“indiscriminately,” Deut 12:15). The latter is the meaning in this instance. The first-hand of Q again has κρέα ὕιον as in 65:4 (and ὕιον without κρέα in 66:3); A also has ὕιον; Q’s corrector changed to ὕειον (Rahlfs and Ziegler). In S, the reading ϋεια was changed by corrector cb2 to ϋειῶν, and by cb2 again to ϋειον, matching B (ὕειον in Q, Rahlfs and Ziegler).
18 Manuscripts Q, A, and B have no verb ἐπίσταμαι at the end of the paragraph (present in S, 958, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler). Eusebius read the phrase ἔρχομαι συναγαγεῖν twice; he interpreted κἀγὼ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν καὶ τὸν λογισμὸν ἔρχομαι συναγαγεῖν together: “And I am coming to gather their works and reasonings.” Then he interpreted πάντα τὰ ἔθνη καὶ τὰς γλώσσας ἔρχομαι συναγαγεῖν, “I am coming to gather all the nations and tongues” (2.58).
19 Only here is שׂים translated by καταλείπω; normally καταλείπω is a translation of שׁאר. The Hebrew behind ἐπʼ αὐτῶν is בהמה. Ottley said, “here their rendering, though the idea is easy (cf. σημεῖον αἰώνιον, 55:13), is not what might be expected: nor is והשׁאירתי ‘and I will leave’ very near ושׂמתי, that it should have been misread” (2:386). Instead of σεσῳσμένους with the iota subscript, Swete and Ottley spelled it σεσωσμένους. Θαρσείς is the spelling used by Q, Swete, and Ottley; Rahlfs and Ziegler spelled it Θαρσις. The relative pronoun οἵ is masculine, and could refer either to those saved (σεσῳσμένους) or to the inhabitants of the places just mentioned. Grammatically, the masculine σεσῳσμένους is preferable, but the context prefers the inhabitants because they do not know God. Eusebius read it in the latter way, writing τοῦτο δὴ οὖν “τὸ σπέρμα” τὸ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐκείνων τῶν ἀπολλυμένων διασωθὲν ἐξαποστελῶ φησιν εἰς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ ἀλλογενῆ καὶ ἀλλόφυλα, εἰς Θαρσεῖς καὶ Φοὺδ καὶ Λοὺδ καὶ Μοσὸχ καὶ Θοβὲλ καὶ εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ εἰς τὰς νήσους τὰς πόρρω, οἳ οὐκ ἀκηκόασι τὸ ὄνομά μου οὐδὲ ἑωράκασι τὴν δόξαν μου (2.58). So the “seed” is those saved, and they are sent to the foreign peoples. Instead of ἑωράκασίν (the spelling of S and A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), Q and B spell it ἑοράκασιν. Only S includes the words τὰ ἔργα καί, but the corrected reading μου τὴν δόξαν of cb2, shared with B, deserves more attention, despite the reading τὴν δόξαν μου of both Q and A.
20 Adrian Schenker claimed that the Greek μετά ψαλμων is earlier than the Hebrew בכלי טהור (both MT and 1QIsaa). Schenker attributed the change partially to a shift of interest from celebration toward ritual purity (Schenker 2010). Paul mentioned his mission to the Gentiles and the acceptability of their offerings in Rom 15:16: εἰς τὸ εἶναί με λειτουργὸν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα γένηται ἡ προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἡγιασμένη ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.
21 Instead of Λευίτας (the spelling also of S, A, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), B spells it Λευείτας.
Your seed and name will be established(66:22)[[@Bible:Isa 66:22-24]]
22 Since chapter 61, Jerusalem has appeared more often than Zion. The stability of what God made is mentioned in Hebrews 12:27: τὸ δὲ ἔτι ἅπαξ δηλοῖ τὴν τῶν σαλευομένων μετάθεσιν ὡς πεποιημένων, ἵνα μείνῃ τὰ μὴ σαλευόμενα. 2 Pet 3:13 alludes to this new sky and new earth (καινοὺς δὲ οὐρανοὺς καὶ καινὴν γῆν) as does Rev 21:1 (Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶ γῆν καινήν. ὁ γὰρ πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ ἀπῆλθαν καὶ ἡ θάλασσα οὐκ ἔστιν ἔτι).
All flesh will worship Lord in Jerusalem(66:23)[[@Bible:Isa 66:22-24]]
23 The use of ἐκ for temporal sequence is described in BDAG s.v. ἐκ ⑤.ⓑ.α, citing 2 Peter 2:8’s ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας as “day after day.”
Transgressors will become a spectacle(66:24)[[@Bible:Isa 66:22-24]]
24 Instead of τελευτήσει (the reading also of S, B, and followed by Rahlfs and Ziegler), A has τελευτᾷ, a harmonization to Mark 9:48, which has ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται.